Posted: Jun 06, 2010 5:00 pm
Invictus_88 wrote:LIFE wrote:shh wrote:Nietzchse, for his awesomeness, and I have to say, I don't understand why so many people claim he's hard to understand, he seems a lot clearer than most to me, Kant, just because of his importance, I have to admit, the Critique was probably the most diffficult book I've ever read
That's interesting, I found Kant to be a lot easier to read than Nietzsche.
But maybe that's because Kant's philosophy is much more in line with mine (nice rhyme).
Nietzsche is pretty clear once you get that he's not always arguing directly, that some of his arguments are phrased in irony. 'Thus Spake Zarathustra' is probably the most obscure, but even than it's pretty comprehensible once you tune into the symbolism.
What of Kant did you read? I tried getting through his Critiques and they were utterly impenetrable, more use as doorsteps than anything else. After "What is Enlightenment?", Kant seems to get very very difficult to read.
I haven't read the Critiques but I wonder how they can be so much different from the rest? Maybe some stuff gets lost in translation?
I've read Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals, Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime and The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God if my mind serves me well.
I have to add that we dealt a lot with Kant in philosophy class, prior to me reading some of his works so maybe I was more in tune with his writing style than I ever was with Nietzsche. I fail to interpret his symbolism in Thus Spake Zarathustra in the right way
