A
Anonymous01/16/26, 13:40No.16892998
>If we assume that the world has no beginning in time, then up to every given moment an eternity has elapsed, and there has passed away in that world an infinite series of successive states of things. Now the infinity of a series consists in the fact that it can never be completed through successive synthesis. It thus follows that it is impossible for an infinite world-series to have passed away, and that a beginning of the world is therefore a necessary condition of the world's existence.
54
Replies
A
Anon01/16/26, 13:41No.16893001
Inmaculate
A
Anon01/16/26, 14:18No.16893023
>philosophy
by brainlets, for brainlets
A
Anon01/17/26, 20:21No.16893821
Who is this guy and why is he quoting Zeno but retardedly?
A
Anon01/17/26, 22:09No.16893876
Kant's quote is one of the paradoxes he presented as evidence for his transcendental aesthetic. He also presented the opposite argument whereas if time (or space) has boundaries, what is beyond those boundaries? His solution was transcendental idealism. Just as the mind overlays categories of perception to shape our experience of the world, time and space are what he called "forms of the intuition", what our mind uses to make sense of and categorize reality so that the chaos of pure sensation has meaning. His presenting reality as we know it to be dependent entirely on the observer was his greatest contribution to philosophy and a death blow to the empiricism that reigned at the time.
A
Anon01/21/26, 03:11No.16895861
Doesn't this mean that time is a loop? Every possible event has already happened, therefore said events must happen again some time in the future if the universe continues existing forever.
A
Anon01/21/26, 09:18No.16895956
If we assume that motion is continuous, then up to every given moment there has passed away an infinite series of successive states of things. Now the infinity of a series consists in the fact that it can never be completed through successive synthesis. It thus follows that continuous motion is impossible.Cutting edge stuff!All considered, Germanic thinkers were never really that intelligent.
A
Anon01/21/26, 16:05No.16896085
This is why philosophers aren't studied in science books
A
Anon01/21/26, 17:16No.16896122
This paradox only arises because he tacitly assumes time has a beginning and is not infinite in both directions. And anyway, the concept of time "beginning" just hides the paradox in some undescribed "before time".
philosophy requires a pen and paper.
science requires a pencil, paper, and wastebasket.
A
Anon01/21/26, 19:12No.16896178
I kinda regret getting needlessly aggressive with the Kant guy. Most of the other posters here are much worse. Guess brainlet fatigue has made me a bit trigger-happy. Maybe I should have explained more patiently what I meant: it's true that Zeno's infinite sequence of events is only potential; you can conceptualize dividing forever in principle, but that doesn't make motion infinitely divided. On the other hand, if I'm watching Achilles run and I take note of when he crosses the half-way point, are you gonna tell me that was only a "potential" event and didn't really happen? I just saw it with my own eyes. As far as I'm concerned, that's a real, discrete event and it happened. But what if I hadn't taken note? What if no one had? Does that mean it didn't happen? If you say it did happen, you're right back at Zeno's starting point. But if you say it didn't happen, you're denying its actuality only on the basis that there wasn't anybody for whom it was an actual event. Now take this logic and apply it in this thread's context. If the timeline of the universe stretches infinitely in both directions, then anyone thinking Kant's thought can conceive of an infinite number of potential events that must have preceded that thought, but for whom are they actual? Not for any being that has a beginning. And for all I know, maybe that's just another way to get at Kant's point.
A
Anon01/22/26, 04:37No.16896473
kant is a hack
A
Anon01/23/26, 01:24No.16897073
there are many parallel Earths. changing your frequency you move from one to another without noticing
A
Anon01/23/26, 04:23No.16897115
>Now the infinity of a series consists in the fact that it can never be completed through successive synthesis
Changing the signedness of infinity changes the meaning and has consequences. It's in the name. "Infinite regression." It's a regressive series, not a successive one. Yes, that matters. Simply consult with the fact that zero comes after all the negative integers for a practical example of why this claim isn't quite right.>and there has passed away in that world an infinite series of successive states of things
Only in non-standard analysis in which the above assertion doesn't hold water at all. The present can indeed be modeled as the supremum of all prior states like this.
In standard analysis, it's more that the series of regressive states diverges from infinity, which is the inverse equivalent of successive states converging to infinity.Kant's worst problem is that he was born before a lot of basic mathematics in this domain was actually worked out. He simply didn't have the shoulders of giants to stand on and as a result his model of the world suffered. I'm sure he be well versed in the work of Goedel if he lived with us today, and would avoid saying such silly things were that the case.
A
Anon01/23/26, 04:38No.16897117
Why is this posted on this board?
A
Anon01/23/26, 08:52No.16897196
You are right in the middle of finite, or people would lose their meaning.
A
Anon01/23/26, 23:26No.16897715
All the people Kant filters..(Holy crap, these captcha's have mathematically stepped it up a notch. It's now expiring before I can find the solution.)
A
Anon01/24/26, 09:32No.16897987
this just in: the number 0 cannot exist because there are an infinity of numbers becore it.all philosophers are dunces
kant was a philosopher
-------------
?
A
Anon01/26/26, 01:02No.16899374
No.
(No to all)