LS Re: Breakneck Kant 2


Magnus Berg (qmgb@bull.se)
Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:20:34 +0100


Just one more thing

Donald T Palmgren wrote:
>
> Kant thought that the aplicability of math to experience poses a
> problem and therefor was a senthetic disciplin. Hume (a British sckeptic)
> had said that the scientific method was an a prior-synthetic disciplin and
> since such a thing was imposible, science yields no truth. In plainer
> words: Can you have knowledge of (the world of) experience prior to
> experience? Hume says no - Kant says yes - Hegel gives a strenuous no -
> Pirsig says yes.

I wish you'd stop misquoting Pirsig in each and every post. I guess
you're referring to Quality with this "knowledge prior to experience".
But there's nothing certain about Quality at all. Kant's a priori
knowledge is something which is true, Pirsig's Quality is something
which is good.

I know that "good" in SOMese is very fuzzy and subjective. The church
of reason scorns good and acknowledges only truth. But if you follow
the truth-trail to the end, you discover that all truths are axioms
resting on nothing but themselves, valid in no other context but
within themselves. This goes for metaphysics too. I really like
Platt's answer to "What is philosophy?". Applied to truths it
becomes, "Give me a truth and I'll find the underlying assumptions.".

Good is more real than truth.

Thanks for the Kant posts, keep'em coming.

        Magnus

-- 
"I'm so full of what is right, I can't see what is good"
                                N. Peart - Rush



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:48 CEST