Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9073 total)
86 online now:
AZPaul3, Tangle (2 members, 84 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,347 Year: 4,459/6,534 Month: 673/900 Week: 0/197 Day: 0/30 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Immanuel Kant
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 4273 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001

Message 46 of 46 (15038)
08-08-2002 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by blitz77
08-08-2002 5:45 AM

In this case Blitz, it would have to be someone I do know if I spell correctly "Plotisky" that would mediate an addition to the Maxwell the B-fish "
spit" out (but you know I have not "inbuilt" emoticom production line but that would only DREAM that Hegel would have responded not to the treated subject that I KNOW it could never be Kant to so respond. Of Course my earlier thought was just to realize that Derrida was wrong but now I know he was only "pretending" so-so did that Babble FIsh if that is the time it would take to have the question put to Derrida forgiven but unless you are privy to the actual communication you may feel like this is all nonesene and the same result I got from Derrida's friend at Cornell who wanted to commissurate in my mental state. I assert that Russel's end is not Derrida's and the science of this is what I speak not the mere translation issue that is likely not even able to keep the little neurobiology with Freud that I agree with that Derrida may have used in this synthesis of the matter. This is a Kant thread and not Hegel one so the B-Fish is not likely the result in line with the this thread with any French or Englsh and besides I refer back to what Derrida said directly to me. He said nothing other in 2001 only others tried to ask him the same question I did. That has nothing to do with Kant but beyond Freud in noticing the STRUCTURE would already have been in Kant no mater the dialetical-non dialectical time interval and I go in the direction again with Russel and not were Derrida WILL go if he ever understood that the book I am writing is in content the non-Derridian context at least in part that much of his logorehea would have been in my language. So also that is not what comes out. Thoug by this time I may begin to use and understand knoweldge based systems the b-fish included. At present I tend to follow Pascal and turn away from these things that do not even seem to follow the rules. You responded to something that had me think of Croizat and that I had not even mentioned between the Hegel and Kant in the answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by blitz77, posted 08-08-2002 5:45 AM blitz77 has taken no action

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022