Not sure what you're addressing, Eastern nondualism isn't Western monism, I can't make sense of something like "it's all and only phenomena". For that I would have to split reality into noumena and phenomena first and then discard the noumena, which is a double error. Ineed I haven't read Kant but he seems to be addressing a phenomena-noumena categorization, which doesn't exist.Arising_uk wrote: ↑Fri Jul 20, 2018 12:42 pmLike I say, people who haven't bothered to read Philosophy. Monism works with Kant's critique if you like, as he wasn't positing a duality but just a critique of what Reason can say about phenomena and the metaphysical assumption of a substrate he called the Noumena or 'thing-in-itself'. Of course you could just say its all and only phenomena(my personal choice as one of the things I know without doubt) but you'd have to say what you think Neuroscience and Quantum Mechanics has said with respect to these issues before I could change my mind that, so far, no-one has come up with a credible critique of Kant's critique, jobs or not.Atla wrote:It's a baseless, unnecessary, and additional assumption to posit a noumenon-phenomenon duality, especially in the light of modern neuroscience and QM. Actually there isn't a single scientific evidence from any field, that would demonstrate such a duality. People like Kant were basically refuted, but philosophers still need a job.
Yeah I haven't read much Western philosophy since it's all fundamentally defective since like Plato. Modern science has confirmed that there are no fundamental divisions, separations in reality as far as we can tell. We can even confirm it in a laboratory how the "contents of our mind" and the "world ot there" always correlate, are inseparable, are one and the same. (Which is of course not saying that how we percieve the world is accurate.)