That works as an answer in non-dualism (because the thing itself is nothing other than one’s consciousness so it’s not “unknowable) but it does’t work as an answer in the metaphysics of Aquinas.
>The Blessed in the Kingdom of Heaven Will See the Punishments of the Damned So That Their Bliss May Be More Delightful to Them
Aquinas is a sadist, don't @ me
And the thing in itself is fundamentally unknowable. All of Christianity is made up.
We have access to the thing in itself by our consciousness
>We have access to the thing in itself
read Kant
No he sucks. Schop was a jerk but he beautifully fixed the contradictions of Kant’s epistemology.
What is even the point of this post? Any philosopher can be refuted. Instead of bringing up an argument you tell someone to just read someone else?
He’s parodying internet Marxists. Can’t you take a joke?
That works as an answer in non-dualism (because the thing itself is nothing other than one’s consciousness so it’s not “unknowable) but it does’t work as an answer in the metaphysics of Aquinas.
we dont have access to our unconscious
welcome to the non dual tradition of Hinduism 🙂
>I know the thing that is unknowable by definition.
I guess
You too are god then
unfalsifiable nonsense
>thing in itself
Hegel annihilated this concept 200 years ago.
Aquinas would probably consider you a heretic.
Elaborate.
>The Blessed in the Kingdom of Heaven Will See the Punishments of the Damned So That Their Bliss May Be More Delightful to Them
Aquinas is a sadist, don't @ me
A perfect circle with no beginning or end. Just like God