On Aug 15, 4:52 am, "pico" <p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Kant did not claim that we could actually gain _knowledge_ about
> what transcended our experience.
>
> Quite practical so far, yes?
Nope that's a lie, its your invented wished for version of the reality
of what the git wrote, here read Kant:
"In respect of time therefore, no knowledge of ours begins with
experience" can be found in the very first paragraph of Kant's Pure
Unadulterated Destruction Of Reason.
He said that because, just prior to that very clear and unambiguous
statement, Kant had explained that *objects* were required to awaken
man's experiences for him.
He therefore clearly denied that man was observing an event of objects
in the gaining of his knowledge of time.
He wanted man just to accept his knowledge of time as something that
was born in him.
First sentence second paragraph, [sic]
"That all of our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow
that all of our knowledge begins with experience"
Yet again he denies what you wished he had said and meant.
To deny that Kant claimed man had innate knowledge is absolute
dishonesty.
Kant's own definition of an a priori knowledge is, knowledge man has
completely and totally independent of any experience, alas there is no
such thing in reality.
Interestingly, a Kantian (knucmo) explained that 1 + 7 = 8 was an
example of an a priori knowledge man has, but of course numbers do not
exist in reality, 1 + 7 = 8 means NOTHING in reality unless and until
the man made concept called numbers is directly linked to sensory
reality.
1 WHAT + 7 WHAT = 8 WHAT
Its the WHAT that must be identified to give 1 + 7 = 8 any meaning in,
of or reality.
Numbers and the use of numbers *e.g. math* do not exist in sensory
reality, they mean nothing to other entity but man, they exist as a
*man made*, just like a clock and a set of scales, which man has
invented from observing objects and events existing in sensory reality
outside of his mind, to help him understand and form concepts of
reality, e.g. that he could use to gain further knowldge of reality
and to explain things to other humans.
There is no such thing as a prior knowledge, its a Kantian invention,
be cause like the mystics, there are some things Kant just cant and
didn't explain from sensory evidence and so he invented a priori as
excuse for his ignorance.
Knowledge is man's understanding of or about the reality of the world,
its the result of a construction process, its his understanding of the
world existing totally independent and not dependent upon man's mind,
math clocks and scales are totally dependent upon man's mind.
Michael Gordge
|
