TOP HELP VL c[\ gsbN\ t@Cꗗ ߋO

[ eLgsbNgbv ]

̃gsbNɏ

### X̌x𒴂̂ŃXł܂B

(Xx:100 ݂̃X:100) [gsbN̐VK쐬]
[ gsbNS101L(49-60 \) ]@ << 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 >>
 1739 / inTopicNo.49) @MobiusA낵肢܂I

e/ pipit -(2019/08/24(Sat) 17:49:01)
 MobiusA͂߂܂āBj[FNuւ̏݁AƂĂłB肪Ƃ܂B́u\tB[̐Evj[F发ǂ񂾂ƂȂłB̖{́Aǂ݂܂BƂĂ킩₷LqĂ܂ˁB́AmNwĂ낢ȂƎvĂ܂3N炢NwɂāAmȂƂ炯łBNwɏڂyɐFXĂƗł(^ ^)MobiusAǂ낵肢܂ I
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1738 / inTopicNo.50) @͂߂܂
e/ Mobius -(2019/08/24(Sat) 12:21:24)
 ͂߂܂āBrEXOfQ܂BMobiusƐ\܂BNwɂẮAu\tB[̐EvƂÁuNwIȉAƉȊwƂv炢ǂ񂾂ƂȂANw发́uj[Fvǂ񂾂炢łBJg̓发͓ǂ񂾂Ƃ܂BȎłArEXOœǏĂ̂ċ䂩ꂽ̂ŁAuǂł݂悤ȁHvƎvAǂݎn߂܂BقƂǂĂȂ܂񂪁A낵肢v܂BƂ肠A܂ŁB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1737 / inTopicNo.51) @
e/ pipit -(2019/08/23(Fri) 23:35:26)
 King Gnuhttps://youtu.be/ony539T074w̋ȂȂƎv܂BLOAĂoŌƑqɏ΂܂BLOk[AȂł
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1736 / inTopicNo.52) @Re[30]: z_I_wE
e/ pipit -(2019/08/23(Fri) 23:16:47)
 This critique will expose the groundless nature of the pretensions of these two faculties, and invalidate their claims to the discovery and enlargement of our cognitions merely by means of transcendental principles, and show that the proper employment of these faculties is to test the judgements made by the pure understanding, and to guard it from sophistical delusion. ̔ᔻ́AQ̋@\im&j̐\ĂȂ̂̂ł邱Ƃ\IAPȂ钴z_IƂiŁA̔F̔ƊgƂނ̗v𖳌ɂAāA̋@\̓K؂ȎgpƂ́Ami含jɂ锻f邱ƂƁA\tBXgIȘf킵ی삷邱ƂƖ炩ɂł낤B
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1735 / inTopicNo.53) @Re[29]: z_I_wE
e/ pipit -(2019/08/23(Fri) 22:21:39)
 The second part of our transcendental logic must therefore be a critique of dialectical illusion, and this critique we shall term transcendental dialectic\not meaning it as an art of producing dogmatically such illusion (an art which is unfortunately too current among the practitioners of metaphysical juggling), but as a critique of understanding and reason in regard to their hyperphysical use. āAX̒z_I_w̑񕔂́Aؘُ_Ioij̔ᔻƂȂ˂΂ȂȂBĂ̔ᔻ͒z_Iؘُ_ƌĂԂƂɂȂ邪ÄӖƂ́Â悤ȌoijƒfIɍZpicOȂwȌ|̎itɗs߂ĂZpjƂӖł͂ȂAmi含jƗ̒RinCp[tBWJjIȎgpɊւĂ̔ᔻAƂӖłB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1734 / inTopicNo.54) @Re[28]: z_I_wE
e/ pipit -(2019/08/23(Fri) 20:27:45)
 In this case the exercise of the pure understanding becomes dialectical. ̏ꍇAmi含jؘُ̓_IɂȂĂ̂B
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1733 / inTopicNo.55) @z_I_wE
e/ pipit -(2019/08/23(Fri) 20:19:54)
 Now, as it ought properly to be only a canon for judging of the empirical use of the understanding, this kind of logic is misused when we seek to employ it as an organon of the universal and unlimited exercise of the understanding, and attempt with the pure understanding alone to judge synthetically, affirm, and determine respecting objects in general. āAiz_I͘_̓ej͂m̌oIgp̔f̊Ƃ̂݁AȂׂ̂łȂ̂ɁAAʓIȒm̓̓ƂĎgp悤ƂāAΏۈʂɂāAmi含ĵ݂őIɔfA咣AK肵悤ƂƂA̘̎_͌pB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1731 / inTopicNo.56) @Re[26]: mI
e/ pipit -(2019/08/22(Thu) 21:41:04)
 Now, as it ought properly to be only a canon for judging of the empirical use of the understanding, this kind of logic is misused when we seek to employ it as an organon of the universal and unlimited exercise of the understanding, and attempt with the pure understanding alone to judge synthetically, affirm, and determine respecting objects in general. AAAAꕶAAAAAA؂ڂȂ߂AAA܂΂H΂ȂH II[AAACÂǁA^CgwmIρxɂȂĂIIJg񂹂̎􂢁i~j܂ijˁA񂹁A킩[mIϒׂ[AAAŁAAA iL-j.oOiEEEEj ΂Ăق iO_Oj
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1730 / inTopicNo.57) @Re[25]: mI
e/ pipit -(2019/08/22(Thu) 21:31:42)
 That part of transcendental logic, then, which treats of the elements of pure cognition of the understanding, and of the principles without which no object at all can be thought, is transcendental analytic, and at the same time a logic of truth. mi含j̏ȔF̗lXȗvfƁAȂł͑Ώۂvl邱Ƃs\ƂȂ錴ƂAz_I_ẃ̕Az_I͘_łA͓ɐ^̘_włB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1729 / inTopicNo.58) @Re[24]: mI
e/ pipit -(2019/08/22(Thu) 21:16:38)
 In transcendental logic we isolate the understanding (as in transcendental aesthetic the sensibility) and select from our cognition merely that part of thought which has its origin in the understanding alone. z_I_ŊǗ悤ɁAz_I_wŎ͒mi含jǗāA̔F炻̋Nmi含ĵ݂ɂvl̕IяoB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1726 / inTopicNo.59) @Re[25]: 񕔖 z_IȘ_w
e/ pipit -(2019/08/21(Wed) 22:21:34)
 Accordingly, in the expectation that there may perhaps be conceptions which relate a priori to objects, not as pure or sensuous intuitions, but merely as acts of pure thought (which are therefore conceptions, but neither of empirical nor aesthetical origin)\in this expectation, I say, we form to ourselves, by anticipation, the idea of a science of pure understanding and rational cognition, by means of which we may cogitate objects entirely a priori. A science of this kind, which should determine the origin, the extent, and the objective validity of such cognitions, must be called transcendental logic, ΏۂɃAvIɊւTOȒςłȂoIȒςłȂioNƂTOłȂoNƂTOłȂjAPȂ鏃Ȏvl̓ƂẮ̂悤ȊTO݂邩ȂƂҁA[̊҂̒Ŏ͏qׂB͑OāAȌ含FƗF̊w̗O\zAƁBɂ莄͑ΏۂSɃAvIɎvlł邩ȂB̎̊ẃÂ悤ȁi含◝ɂjF̋NƔ͈͂ƋqϓIÓK肷ׂ̂ŁAz_I_wƌĂ΂ׂ̂łB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/
 1723 / inTopicNo.60) @Re[24]: 񕔖 z_IȘ_w
@
e/ pipit -(2019/08/20(Tue) 18:44:38)
 Neither of these faculties can exchange its proper function. Understanding cannot intuite, and the sensuous faculty cannot think.̐\́A̓L̋@\݂Ɍ邱Ƃ͂łȂBm͒ςłȂAoIȋ@\͍l邱ƂłȂB In no other way than from the united operation of both, can knowledge arise. ҁiƌ含jēȊOɁAm铹͖̂BBut no one ought, on this account, to overlook the difference of the elements contributed by each; Aꂼꂪ^vf̈ႢƂĂ͂ȂBwe have rather great reason carefully to separate and distinguish them. ɂ́Aƌ含imjTdɐ؂藣ʂ邽߂̏dȗRBWe therefore distinguish the science of the laws of sensibility, that is, aesthetic, from the science of the laws of the understanding, that is, logic. 䂦Ɏ́Ao\͂̋K̊wȂ킿_AƁA含imj\͂̋K̊w_wAʂB
pԐM/ԐM 폜L[/

O12 | 12

gsbNy[Wړ / << 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 >>
Mode/@ Pass/

 TOP HELP VL c[\ gsbN\ t@Cꗗ ߋO

- Child Tree -