Hey y'all

I finished my first philosophy manuscript . Here's almost the finished version . I figure y'all can handle it . My first philosophy manuscript is called Kinds and Degrees . I am currently working on my second philosophy manuscript . Neither of these manuscripts are my first or second , but they are respectively my first philosophy manuscript and second philosophy manuscript : the prior being my first first philosophy manuscript and the latter being my first second philosophg manuscript : i call this first second philosophy manuscript Ontic and Idaöntic : this first second philosophy manuscript of mine is possibly the first first second philosophy manuscript to ever been have written yet . This book took many years of research . I hope it will get me into a phd program . The pdf file was made by google drive and is 65 something MB large . It is well over 25000 words . But i'm not much of word count kind of guy . All art unless obvious is mine . All commentary is welcome . I love giving talks . I already have bachelors from a large state school . But they screwed me over with a shitty grandfather grading clause so i have a 2.0 instead of s 3.83 and my life has been a living hell . I figured if i rigorously solved every philosophy problem before applying i'd be a strong candidate for a phd in philosophy . I managed to solve basically every single problem a first philosophy calls to be questioned and resolved : i address historical arguments and arguments about the historical : i solve the einsteineian problem of loss of objectivity in science through a mathematical deduction based on a certain proof from graph theory . I then apply said application (which i call in [shorttitle] Ontics , a "morphic" a la morphisms but sidestepping import of category theoretic presuppositions and ideontics (which are distinct from concepts ( but that's second philosophy stuff ) ) toward a philosophy of sense ( distinct from Baumgarten but not entirely not ) for it is similar to Husserl's states goal of phenomenology in his entry for phenomenology's encyclopedia entry , but I distinguish my first philosophy from Husserl's , Aristotle's , Heidegger's , Sartre's (Herder 2(too) but that's in book too 2 ) , Wittgenstein's , Hegel's , and notably Kant's -- for i found a novel formal proof which refutes all of Kant and establishes a possibility for a speculative realism but without Meillassoux's self-contradictions he imported into his long form argument against Dogmatism ( which i also address in the book ) -- for the philosopher's who would agree with my work , I found that their work simply was of a slightly different consequent of similar enough trajectory to not outright completely dispute / refute ( hume and spinoza ) -- I turn Deleuze on his head -- I do not address much ethics outside of a support of a kind of logical utilitarianism but via a plurality which alleviates any necessarily totalitarian entailment of logicism , a worry of many in the past . I also refute Nietzsche and Schopenhauer where necessary . I also refute Cassirer .

https://drive.google.com/file/d/11iM8KJnc8SW349Y1qaZzkr55ABmOQ0n0/view?usp=sharing

All commentary is welcome , since everyone i've spoken to about it or shown it to have not had anything other to say except agreement and understanding

Bests ,

Jacob Roman

The author