Title: Seriously?
Product review: If this is a guidebook for the virgin entering the murky waters of Kantian lingo, at least have the decency to be clear and unassuming. What greatly irked me is that the author attempted to describe Kant's use of the term 'intuition' (which for the American reader is being used as a misnomer) as "phenomenological." Now, the school of phenomenology was founded by Husserl, in the 20th century, and developed from his readings of Kant. How the hell is the reader supposed to know what phenomenology is, and how is that word supposed to clarify a Kantian neologism, if its very existence dates AFTER the book the reader is a virgin to?Unfortunately like many philosophy text, this one is pedantic, and ostentatious. Once gets the impression that many philosopher can't write simple layman text, because they know more scholarly folks will be reading their work, and would rather not come across as less than ingenious.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
