..." <tronfuru@frizurf.no> wrote: ....>>The question is, if perception is a constructivist...constructivist in my sense. Then your question is, what bearing does it have...in that book. QED. Because your question really amounts to asking, "How do... area ... and I suspect the question is on the meaningless side. ... along the line your rhetorical question. How does this model becomes a...
...>(http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1716111). The question is, if perception is a constructivist activity (in...an unnamed premise or perhaps "axiom." Then your question is, what bearing does it have on epistemology...title and came no closer to answering that question as there is not one ounce of epistemology in that book. Because your question really amounts to asking, "How do percepts ...
..." It is this kind of "constructivism" I had in mind, a model which also has venerable roots, like the Helmholtz-Gregory constructivist theory of perception (http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1716111). The question is, if perception is a constructivist activity (in this sense), does it have a bearing on epistemology? And if so, what is it? T
...>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:29:25 +0100, "Tron" <tronfuru@frizurf.no> wrote: If so, which? And what are the alternatives? Any which is viable? Empiricism is begging the question. Grounding the Cogito in thinking itself is circular. Objectivism grounding logic in the senses is just a variation on Descartes' petitio. Locke's philosophy is another example of this. Hume was ...
... On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:29:25 +0100, "Tron" <tronfuru@frizurf.no> wrote: If so, which? And what are the alternatives? Any which is viable? Empiricism is begging the question. Grounding the Cogito in thinking itself is circular. Objectivism grounding logic in the senses is just a variation on Descartes' petitio. Locke's philosophy is another example of this. Hume was right, ...
... could only be defended by reference to some standard or other. If the standard under dispute is invoked, then the question has been begged. If another standard is appealed to, the question arises again, to be answered either by circular reasoning or by appeal to yet another standard. So either the process ...
... you just pulling out a few nice quotes or reading throught the whole work for context? What you are failing to mention is that the whole gist of the Critique of Pure Reason is to tackle the question of what Kant called 'a-priori' knowledge, so naturally, empirical psychology would be deemed irrelevant to the intent of the work; however, I was not describing 'a-priori' but 'a-postieori' ...
... or even limitations of a purely empirical epistemology - Lockean, Humean or otherwise? If so, which? And what are the alternatives? Any which is viable? Empiricism is begging the question. Grounding the Cogito in thinking itself is circular. Objectivism grounding logic in the senses is just a variation on Descartes' petitio. Locke's philosophy is another example of this. Hume was ...
... just pulling out a few nice quotes or reading throught the whole work for context? What you are failing to mention is that the whole gist of the Critique of Pure Reason is to tackle the question of what Kant called 'a-priori' knowledge, so naturally, empirical psychology would be deemed irrelevant to the intent of the work; however, I was not describing 'a-priori' but 'a-postieori' knowledge...
... for his specific knowledge of time and space And I am trying to find out ultimately what material objects Rand experiences for her specific knowledge of "unit" and "percept." -- Such little questions, so many times... Rand is not taken seriously in serious universities. Why do you all waste so much time on a novelist? Usenet is a waste of time. So what of it? -- We...
