Re: Did Man's Knowledge Of Weight and Distance Arrive Before Any

brian fletcher wrote:
> "pico" <pico@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 

>> Kant said that the a priori knowledge was not knowledge 'out there' and

>> independent of us. What was 'out there' makes itself (or some of
itself) 
>> known to us through our senses and then became available to empirical 
>> knowledge (experiencing .)
> 
> This gets to the very heart of the "matter" re trees falling etc etc.
> 
> "Out there" is a swirling infinity of "all there is". "Our" sensual 
> perceptions  have developed to the quantum level. This is a step closer
to 
> the understanding of the true nature of the observer.

Perhaps we can use this as a point of departure in a separate thread to 
explore notions of the limits (or lack thereof) of divisibility and 
reduction. Scale is difficult for us to manage. We've toyed with the 
idea of the infinitely large and tentatively accepted it, but the 
possibility of an infinity of division seems culturally forbidden.