Can this be justified?

[Trevor Salyzyn]

I was trying to think of a way to give Kant the benefit of the doubt, when I came up with the following thought:

Kant wrote the longest piece of theological satire ever written, in a trilogy of Critiques: The Critique of Pure Reason, the Critique of Practical Reason, and the Critique of Judgment. The double-entendre on the word critique caused many people to take it seriously, as their criticisms of reason and judgment crippled many would-be philosophers to the point where post-modernism seemed like a good idea.

So, did Kant have a sense of humour?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

So, did Kant have a sense of humour?

No, at the time I believe the word critique was only understood to mean review or analyze.

There's an interesting element to this however: why this word in the last two centuries increasingly has gotten so negatively interpreted to the degree of being now almost totally changed into a solely negative review.

A backlash against the age of reason? Souls getting more sensitive for the harsh cr sound?

[Matt Gregory]

You could walk up to any women and say something very objective and logical about her dress and she would interpret it negatively and get offended. Look at Samadhi's reaction in the cellphone thread, saying all reasonable views in there are due to "resentment". So, in this way, the whole idea of objectivity has come to have negative connotations.

[Trevor Salyzyn]

How can you be objective and logical about a woman's dress? "The top of your dress is at your shoulders, and the bottom is around your knees." *slap*

Since I posted the last attempt, I've thought of another philosopher to describe. This one might be less questionable.

Thales did for meteorology what Darwin did for biology and Newton did for physics.

As a footnote as to the new paradigms required, Darwin drew a parallel between Lyell's theories of geology and the transmutation of species, Newton created calculus, and Thales invented empirical science.

I really think Thales deserves a decent biography, or even an historical fiction novel about him, but I think that would go against the spirit of his philosophy. (A quotation of his: "Never did many words declare a mindful teaching.") I can't bring myself to write one.

[Matt Gregory]

How can you be objective and logical about a woman's dress?

Like if you're chatting up some woman and you say, "Hey, I saw a dress just like that at K-Mart!"

You're just making a logical connection between her dress and one you experienced earlier and sharing that connection with her, but she's almost guaranteed to get offended. It takes a lot of training to avoid sharing these types of connections with people.

[David Quinn]

I remember going out with a girl once whose facial features resembled my mother's in her youth. My mother was rather beautiful in her youth and so I naturally wanted to share this with the girl. To say she was shocked and offended is an understatement, a reaction that didn't go away even after my explaining that it was a compliment (as well as true). It rather soured the rest of the night and I never saw her again.

-

[brokenhead]

I remember going out with a girl once whose facial features resembled my mother's in her youth. My mother was rather beautiful in her youth and so I naturally wanted to share this with the girl. To say she was shocked and offended is an understatement, a reaction that didn't go away even after my explaining that it was a compliment (as well as true). It rather soured the rest of the night and I never saw her again.

-

I'm just guessing, but it was probably not as much what you said to the girl but the way you said it that ruined the evening.