Mww

There is an entire Enlightenment philosophy predicated on a similar conclusion. So either your conclusion isn’t as radical as you supposed, or, your c...

I asked, because you brought them up. I’m guessing you know what a can of worms they are, which makes me wonder….why bring them up, then do nothing wi...

Agreed, in principle. What does any of that have to do with existential absolutes or foundational existences? I mean, you brought them up….I guess….in...

No. An existential absolute. Or, apparently, just recently, your foundation of existence. Is one the same as the other?

So the main thesis does not concern foundational intuitions, but rather, an existential absolute with respect to the implicit and elusive something sc...

There is no wrong in speculative metaphysics; just coherence, and logical consistency to support it. The notion of foundational intuitions initially b...

“…. because it is self-consciousness which, whilst it gives birth to the representation “I think,” must necessarily be capable of accompanying all our...

Because, as you say, it’s a summary, or an abstract, sort of, hence there isn’t a proof per se. There is only, in the text that follows, an affirmativ...

I don’t think so. Not exactly. You can do as you wish, re: appeal to intuition, but you must first treat the thing-in-itself differently, such that it...

A most valiant effort.

Do you see that neither of your follow-up’s relate to what I said? ……Possible knowledge, knowledge not in residence, cannot be from experience that is...

I only said what my mind is not. I’ve said before I don’t hold that minds are anything beyond an object of reason, which negates that I may be what’s ...

Things-in-themselves concerns things. Minds are not things. Things-in-themselves do not include minds. I am not a mind; I am a conscious intelligence,...

For example, under transcendental idealism I don’t think you can claim: there are other minds; that you have a mind; that you have representative facu...

One of the subtleties of metaphysics in general, is the recognition that only through reason can reason be examined, from which follows that all that ...

The a priori/a posteriori distinction is determined by the what, not by the where. While understanding creates it own objects, re: numbers, a priori, ...

The true origin of the possibility of our proofs, is in reason and is a priori. The origin of the proofs themselves, is in understanding, and is a pos...

Kindasorta, I guess. The whole possibility of mathematical processes is predicated on the principle reason provides a priori, which itself is derived ...

But I am necessarily extrapolating it from phenomena. It would be impossible to be informed of whatever phenomena does tell me, if there weren’t any. ...

That would be the case if the reversal went further than authorized by the normal Kantian method. Same as transcendental philosophy, except the latter...

Often is the case….like, almost always…..that the origin of an idea, and the use of that conception subsumed under it, are treated without regard for ...

Isn’t relation the manifestation of a difference? The very conception of a synthetic a priori cognition, the backbone of transcendental philosophy, sp...

Man, after reading that, it appears you’re more familiar with this stuff than you let on when talking to me. Which makes much of what I say pretty muc...

Yes, exactly. Knowledge or possible knowledge a posteriori. To know metaphysically is knowledge a priori, as opposed to empirical knowledge. Knowledge...

That’s why I said I agreed, in principle. You said we say something about x, and we do, but not at the time of x. We say determinate things about x af...

Agreed, in principle; we say they exist, and that necessarily. But if we can say they exist necessarily, there’s nothing added by saying they have a c...

Sorry, I’m not up on the science, and I’m not going to pretend otherwise by reading wiki for 2 or 3 minutes. But, yeah, I see what appears to be color...

I made a mistake. The line should have said…. Things-in-themselves can be inferred AS the possibility of sensations in general a priori. Yep. The so-c...

Working backwards: our representations are not all alike, therefore our sensations are not all alike, therefore the effects things have on sensibility...

I see what you mean, but I would ask, and referencing Russell, doesn’t the plethora of white things simultaneous with our naming practices and awarene...

Sure, why not? Denominator indicates a underlying standardization, common denominator indicates an underlying standardization for all to which it cond...

Well done.

Maybe, but more likely my misunderstanding of what the words I read are supposed to represent. You know…..guy spends most of his philosophical life in...

Things-in-themselves can be inferred the possibility of sensations in general a priori. The thing as it appears, and from which sensation is given, ma...

Thanks. ‘Preciate it.

Things-in-themselves aren’t what appear, never become a sensation, so, yes, those are what we don’t know. If the thing-in-itself appeared to me it wou...

quote="Bob Ross;813236"]if the logical part of the system is not a part of the thing-in-itself and is not phenomena, then what is it? To me, it either...

There’s a box on the shelf at the post office…. (a.k.a., a thing-in-itself) Guy brings you the box…. (a.k.a, your perception of a thing) ….hands it to...

That time of year, me ‘n’ the Better Half pack up, temporarily donate the furry grandkids to a sitter, and hit the road. Maybe there’s a message herei...

Are you implying the difference in knowledge from the human olden days to the human current days, is a reflection of a changing world? If so, sure, wh...

Technically, it is only knowledge of representations, hence not of the world per se. The amendments to our representations over time corresponds to th...

So…..mid-Enightenment, in the schools, Aristotle and God were still in charge. K comes along, paradigm-shifts cognitive metaphysics away from God, mai...

Agreed; I’ll go with the three logical laws of thought. Is it just the same to say representation of immaterial ideas are what’s expressed in space an...

I’m having trouble here. The representation is never the physical stuff, and the mental is sometimes what is represented. How is yours not backwards? ...

Right. I mentioned not too long ago that, in us, thoughts are singular and successive, presupposing the condition of time, so it is reasonable we do n...

You’re on record as admitting a Schopenhauer-ian bent. He was the champion of the PSR, yet brute facts negate the PSR. It must be that being “metaphys...

Cool. Socratic dialectics? Robert’s Rules? Jousting? Cards on the table kinda thing, I must say, if we’re discussing analytic idealism from a Kantian ...

Before getting into all that, you’re promoting analytic idealism, which is interesting in itself. The problem is that attempting to understanding Kant...

Where in the data….is perspective. Inside us, outside the data.

I’m saying it doesn’t, taken from Kant’s original text. Apparently we’re at odds over interpretations, which is certainly nothing new. Be that as it m...