TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:18 pm
SpheresOfBalance wrote: ↑Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:08 pm
TimeSeeker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:45 pm
Translation: either you accept some axiomatic/self-evident/a-priori truths (by equivocation: Gods!) on faith or you don't.
There is no such thing as a-priori knowledge, only ever a-posteriori knowledge, thus truths!
And since you are making assertions - that's a performative contradiction
You accept SOMETHING on faith. And you don't know what it is. It's usually a good idea to find it and acknowledge it.
I accept entropy and Physical information on faith (
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_information )
Colloquially: order and chaos
Call it what you will. In my language it is a transfer characteristics. Given some Input it produces output.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_box
In order to produce “a-posterior knowledge m” you still need to input SOMETHING.
What do you call that input?
Go back to the beginning of life. Though if you're a theist, that believes in the ridiculous story of Adam and Eve as human origin, and ignore all archeological evidence. Then there's no use talking to you, because I really don't know how to speak "grabbing crap right out of thin air," then believing even for a second that any sense can be made of it.
Though I could ask you to go back to your first breath. But I know you can't, unless of course you have children and were there in that moment, and can understand that image was in fact what you were in that same moment of your life. Though it would still be impossible for you to crawl into their mind as if it were yours in that same instant. But then if you could actually do that, you'd also have to understand the horrible stories of children kept in closets, boxes, or basements, to only be supplied food and water, no social interactions, understanding what they were when it was found to be the case, so as to understand the fallacy of a-priori knowledge. You know what the letter A is because you were programmed as to what it was, otherwise we'd just sit and stare at it with a dumbfounded look on our faces.
Since the beginning of our time we have, very slowly indeed, added to that which we have created in our minds, concepts, largely due to our fear of death and then wonder in it's face so as to evade it. In all cases the external environment was that which lent to our eventual understanding, and that understanding, however it's relationship to the actual truth of things, was always a-posteriori of the external events, such that we eventually rationalized conceptual framing. It was a slow process indeed filled with all kinds of gods, due to our intellectual ignorance. Anyway, each new concept was born a-posteriori of the previous that it was built upon, thus there is no such thing as a-priori knowledge. Knowledge can only ever come after an event. For instance, certainly ancient man had dealings with lightening from the sky (much later to be called the heavens), while he initially attributed it to gods, he wouldn't understand it's true essence until thousands of years of watching it went by, as he slowly came to terms with it as one a-posteriori understanding led to another, a cascade effect.
There is no such thing as a-priori knowledge. Everything was learned after the fact!
No one can prove that they knew of anything before they were taught it.
