19 July 2013
20 minute workout at 5:40 AM: 200 (agonizing) lowrise steps followed by 75 supine weight moves. Woke up in pain but now it’s gone without having to take a breakout painkiller after the workout.
As touching the congee situation. Yesterday was an Oatmeal day (aaaaarrrggh) which more or less guarantees that today’s congee won’t be oatmeal, and I love all the other brands, none of which has that sweetness I despise.
Beginning to isolate again on my bed as opposed to going to the dayroom, need to work and socialize there.
My Cambridge University Press copy of the Critique of Pure Reason is in a frightful state, dog-eared, dirty, spine broken and taped up in several places. I like this, it shows what an effort I made to understand Kant.
Now reading the comments of Watkins in the Cambridge Companion on the next part, the Analytic of Principles, which is as best I can discern is how we think using Kant about the scientific world. I have read this material but not as intensively when I realized that the preceding two “chapters” were more essentially Kant.
How on earth to explain Kant to a child? There’s actually a movement in philosophy, Philosophy for Kids, guaranteed to give the boys in Texas’ state legislature a fit and therefore worthy of our support; last year, the boys down in Texas banned all curricula about “critical thinking’ as is found in the International Baccalaureate, preferring teens to listen instead to their local Im-ams oops pastors and Mom and above all Dad.
Given this it’d be very droll to teach, not just critical thinking but also philosophy to kids. I used to poke into my Dad’s books, some of which were about philosophy. The one entitled Metaphysics was the most promising but disappointed the most for it was of course, absolutely incomprehensible.
But if a kid asks about Kant, we Kan explain him.
I’d say or sing, “Mr KANT is hard to understand, oh even most grownups KANT understand him: but as best as I can see or say, Mr Kant said, when we see we say what it is we see!”
“Little Peter Popple Stinkums would point and say, ‘dat TRAIN’, and then he’d point and say aGAIN, right as RAIN, ‘dat NUVVER TRAIN’, that’s ANOTHER train.”
“You see to say for Peter was to see. Mr Kant would say that Peter was constructing his world in which Peter’s mere sensation, the big and noisy train entering his sight and hearing, was CHANGED into a real perception because old Peter (jungly Peter) imposed a category, that of train, upon what would have otherwise been a BLOB. Yuk.”
A blob! A blob! Bad job! Don’t be a slob!
Look and think and see and say and don’t say you Kant!
You know, some child development theorists say we reach our intellectual peak at eleven or twelve years of age. There’s no reason why Philosophy for Kids wouldn’t help them. We don’t teach philosophy outside of university because of religious fears of pastors who think kids might find, in philosophy, reasons to get crazy and paaaaartaay down when, of course, they need no reason in their teenage years.