Bee in bonnet time: I hate Kant’s “categories”, sitting in their neat 4 * 3 table. Why only four, why those four, why does each four have three, are each of the threes supposed to ‘map onto’ each other?
Being very vaguely analogous to some equally arbitrary, obsolete things that Aristotle did thousands of years previously doesn’t seem to me very good reason for modern philosophers to take Kant’s categories seriously.
Bee in bonnet time: I hate Kant’s “categories”, sitting in their neat 4 * 3 table. Why only four, why those four, why does each four have three, are each of the threes supposed to ‘map onto’ each other?
Being very vaguely analogous to some equally arbitrary, obsolete things that Aristotle did thousands of years previously doesn’t seem to me very good reason for modern philosophers to take Kant’s categories seriously.
If you’re looking for a Kant defender, you won’t find him in me. :)