It is ridiculous to assert "He [Kant] is not qualified to criticize Gödel's work."godelian wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 6:43 amThe concept of "proof" is the exclusive preserve of mathematics/logic. It is not me who needs to learn to understand Kant's nebulous nonsense. It is Kant who would have had to learn mathematics/logic, which he clearly didn't.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:57 am As I had stated, you are not qualified to critique Kant until you have thoroughly understood [not agree with] Kant's CPR.
Through his own admission, it is Kant who is not qualified to criticize a mathematical proof. His arguments are simply not receivable in the context of mathematics.Kant in Critique of Pure Reason:
"On this account, I shall not reckon among my principles those of mathematics;"
None of the people that you mention -- with possibly Bertrand Russell being the only exception -- understood higher-order modal logic, not even to save themselves from drowning. They cannot criticize Gödel's proof because one cannot criticize what one does not understand.Veritas Aequitas wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2024 5:57 am Godel's Ontological Argument fall as a subset of the Ontological main set. As such the relevant criticism for the ontological arguments are herewith;
It is not only Kant, but you have to counter the above philosophers as well.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontologic ... objections
Criticisms and objections subsection
Gaunilo
Thomas Aquinas
David Hume
Immanuel Kant
Douglas Gasking
William L. Rowe
Coherence of a maximally great being
Bertrand Russell
We do not accept a long-winding nebulous rant of nonsense as a counterargument to a mathematically unobjectionable proof.
It is otherwise very simple. Whenever there is mathematical proof, non-mathematicians cannot argue against it by using word salads. This has never been accepted and will never be accepted.
Again, I have already mentioned that there are people who correctly criticize Gödel's proof. I actually support their views. I would, however, never support an argument produced by Kant. He is not qualified to criticize Gödel's work. There is simply a difference in class and ability between them. Kant is the king of ineptitude. I cannot respect his bullshit.
I bet if Kant has lived during Godel's time, Kant [given his intelligence] would have refuted Godel's argument using the latest mathematics from a mathematical perspective.
Kant was a lecturer in logic during his time.
Lectures on Logic
This merely insult your own intelligence and maturity given that Kant is often polled as one of the greatest W philosopher of all times.Kant is the king of ineptitude. I cannot respect his bullshit.