>>10932064>In the first Critique Kant has found that our reason frequently contradicts itself when it transcends the boundaries of experiencewrong, he says it is grasping, and rarley makes any meaningful developments, which is true. But he attempted to and succeed in purifying what we can say about metaphysical things like god and free will.
>Has something similar been discovered for mathematicsno, and kant talks about mathematics. math is using intuitions of understanding to derive synthetics apriori things. Our math is guided by our understanding of structure ie space time etc
>Especially considering the development in mathematics in the early 20th century that sought to introduce to categories to mathematical thinking. Is it Gödel's incompleteness theorem? I'm basically a retard and don't understand Gödel.kant's categories are different then category theory if that is what you are asking. Kant wanted to find the limits of reason, category theory just presents of formal structure for what is known in mathematics.
Godel's incompleteness theorem is more so a statement about formal systems. Ie the limits of what symbol manipulation is and can do. Put simply: In any system that can talk about the natural numbers, there are things that are true the cant be derived from axioms. This is a heavy blow to the mathematical philosophy known as "formalism" which states that math is simply just moving symbols around according to logical rules.
>>10933583retard detected
