The Transcendental-Idealism-FSRC is outdated

[Veritas Aequitas]

Lol
---------------------

Again you are very deceptive and a cheater.

ChatGpt wrote the following:

Direct and indirect realists indeed argue for the mind's independence from the external world in a more absolute sense, emphasizing that the external world exists independently of our perceptions or mental representations.
This independence extends beyond human existence, as exemplified by your reference to the moon existing before and after humanity.

For ChatGpt to state "more absolute" is an oxymoron can only be in a certain context and not in the above applicable context.

You're an idiot. YOU forced ChatGPT to say "more absolute", which is generally an oxymoron, and also conflicts with other the "absolute indepence" within realism.

THAT'S WHY WE DON'T CALL IT AS SUCH. WE CALL IT MIND-INDEPENDENCE.

You are the real idiot in stating;
I force ChatGPT to say "more absolute"??
You are so stupid.

What is critical here is in context and with the need to take into account empirical realism which also claim 'mind-independence' we need to differentiate the between the absolute mind-independence [of indirect realism] and the relative mind-independence of empirical realism.

[Atla]

Again you are very deceptive and a cheater.

ChatGpt wrote the following:


For ChatGpt to state "more absolute" is an oxymoron can only be in a certain context and not in the above applicable context.

You're an idiot. YOU forced ChatGPT to say "more absolute", which is generally an oxymoron, and also conflicts with other the "absolute indepence" within realism.

THAT'S WHY WE DON'T CALL IT AS SUCH. WE CALL IT MIND-INDEPENDENCE.

You are the real idiot in stating;
I force ChatGPT to say "more absolute"??
You are so stupid.

What is critical here is in context and with the need to take into account empirical realism which also claim 'mind-independence' we need to differentiate the between the absolute mind-independence [of indirect realism] and the relative mind-independence of empirical realism.

You're the real idiot. I AM taking into account the two issues in transcendental idealism + empirical realism, but you are NOT taking into account the two versions of independence in realism, because you keep conflating them as "absolute independence". You can't even get the basics right.

[Veritas Aequitas]

You're an idiot. YOU forced ChatGPT to say "more absolute", which is generally an oxymoron, and also conflicts with other the "absolute indepence" within realism.

THAT'S WHY WE DON'T CALL IT AS SUCH. WE CALL IT MIND-INDEPENDENCE.

You are the real idiot in stating;
I force ChatGPT to say "more absolute"??
You are so stupid.

What is critical here is in context and with the need to take into account empirical realism which also claim 'mind-independence' we need to differentiate the between the absolute mind-independence [of indirect realism] and the relative mind-independence of empirical realism.

You're the real idiot. I AM taking into account the two issues in transcendental idealism + empirical realism, but you are NOT taking into account the two versions of independence in realism, because you keep conflating them as "absolute independence". You can't even get the basics right.

I have exposed your ignorance and deception here:
viewtopic.php?p=704492#p704492

......
........
Overall, your interpretation provides a more accurate portrayal of Kant's philosophical position and his attempt to reconcile empirical realism with transcendental idealism within the framework of the CPR.

[Atla]

You are the real idiot in stating;
I force ChatGPT to say "more absolute"??
You are so stupid.

What is critical here is in context and with the need to take into account empirical realism which also claim 'mind-independence' we need to differentiate the between the absolute mind-independence [of indirect realism] and the relative mind-independence of empirical realism.

You're the real idiot. I AM taking into account the two issues in transcendental idealism + empirical realism, but you are NOT taking into account the two versions of independence in realism, because you keep conflating them as "absolute independence". You can't even get the basics right.

I have exposed your ignorance and deception here:
viewtopic.php?p=704492#p704492

......
........
Overall, your interpretation provides a more accurate portrayal of Kant's philosophical position and his attempt to reconcile empirical realism with transcendental idealism within the framework of the CPR.

Strawman.

Here we have another proof how blatantly dishonest VA is. He didn't present the actual case to ChatGPT, instead he simply said to the AI that I didn't present the proper perspective, which is a lie, and the AI simply believed him, and responded to that claim. It is VA who is deceptive, while trying to frame me as deceptive.

[Veritas Aequitas]

You're the real idiot. I AM taking into account the two issues in transcendental idealism + empirical realism, but you are NOT taking into account the two versions of independence in realism, because you keep conflating them as "absolute independence". You can't even get the basics right.

I have exposed your ignorance and deception here:
viewtopic.php?p=704492#p704492

......
........
Overall, your interpretation provides a more accurate portrayal of Kant's philosophical position and his attempt to reconcile empirical realism with transcendental idealism within the framework of the CPR.

Strawman.

Here we have another proof how blatantly dishonest VA is. He didn't present the actual case to ChatGPT, instead he simply said to the AI that I didn't present the proper perspective, which is a lie, and the AI simply believed him, and responded to that claim. It is VA who is deceptive, while trying to frame me as deceptive.

Handwaving as usual.
Where is your argument?

[Atla]

I have exposed your ignorance and deception here:
viewtopic.php?p=704492#p704492

Strawman.

Here we have another proof how blatantly dishonest VA is. He didn't present the actual case to ChatGPT, instead he simply said to the AI that I didn't present the proper perspective, which is a lie, and the AI simply believed him, and responded to that claim. It is VA who is deceptive, while trying to frame me as deceptive.

Handwaving as usual.
Where is your argument?

Above, and you have yet to respond to it.

Note this is what I actually wrote:

Is this an example of an inconsistency when we subsume empirical realism within transcendental idealism?

but VA left it out in order to strawman me:

My point is Kant did argue in his CPR his empirical realism is subsumed within his transcendental idealism and thus both are reconcilable.

Note that VA has fallen so low that he has to lie to a chatbot. In order to avoid facing the actual wider context, that yes, Kant did argue for their reconcilability, but he was probably wrong. They are usually reconcilable, but probably conflict in a few key areas.