On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 14:55:38 -0800, John Jones <jonescardiff@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>On Nov 14, 8:32?pm, Malrassic Park <male...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:50:18 -0800, knucmo <stevejoua...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 9 Nov, 20:19, Scott H <zinites_p...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> In response to determinism, Kant explains how the antinomy of free
>> >> will arises from a misuse of reason:
>>
>> >> "The possibility of an infinite origination, without a first member
in
>> >> regard to which everything else is merely subsequent, cannot be made
>> >> comprehensible. But if you want to dismiss this puzzle of nature,
then
>> >> you will find yourselves compelled to reject many basic synthetic
>> >> characteristics (basic forces) that you are just as little able to
>> >> comprehend, and even the possibility of a change as such must then
>> >> become objectionable to you."
>>
>> >> Up to here, I followed him. But then he says,
>>
>> >> "For if you did *not* find through experience that change is actual
>> >> [my emphasis on "not"], then you would never be able to excogitate a
>> >> priori how such an unceasing sequence of being and not-being is
>> >> possible."
>>
>> >> If instead of "for" he had written "however," I wouldn't have
>> >> considered it unsound writing. But then I would need a definition of
>> >> "change as such."
>>
>> >> I would have expected a proof by contradiction, i.e., "If you *did*
>> >> find through experience that change was actual, then..."
>>
>> >Very interesting. In the 3rd antinomy, Kant assumes that pure reason
>> >always seeks the unconditioned in a series, and he uses this to
>> >sup****t causality via freedom. But I reckon reason only seeks the
>> >most recent, and sufficient cause. In other words, not every
>> >conditioned supposes a complete set of conditions which ends with the
>> >unconditioned.
>>
>> You're conflating reason and understanding. I noticed you didn't say
>> "pure reason" seeks the most recent. Pure reason is not about finding
>> the most recent of anything, it is primarily concerned with God,
>> Freedom, and Immortality.
>>
>> --
>> fantasybedtimehour.com- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>A question for you and knucmo,
>What is the 'unconditioned'? Can a definition be given that is not
>dependent on a spatial or tem****al framework?
Off-hand, I would define it as "that which in itself has no
precedent."
--
fantasybedtimehour.com
|
