Message from @Existence is identity
Discord ID: 545047542300409858
I shouldve used a posteriori knowledge instead of empirical
They refer to both
The former refers specifically to Kant's terms
They reject that a priori knowledge is possible, so I don't see a difference.
How are you different?
Do you believe contradictions exist?
No.
The cosmos is a tautology, bruh.
Let me play devil advocate
So we know that the sun exists but how do we know it will rise tomorrow?
The sun existing is factually true
How do we know the sun exists?
No, that it will rise tomorrow
How do we know it will rise tomorrow?
Yes
What's your point?
Just answer
We have good reason to believe it will, but we can't know with absolute certainty.
is the russian thing really over?
What Russian thing?
Our mind is flawed right?
For example hallucinations
Its our own subjective experience
Sure.
So?
So what?
Then how do we know things posses an identity?
They are intersubjectively verifiable.
How?
We can understand each other through language can't we?
But why is that?
Logic is universal.
How do you know that?
Its your own subjective experience
Experience is filtered through logically derived a priori knowledge. Logic does not depend on experience.
Our understanding of experience depends on logic.
Based
Well, I guess you arent a Skeptic
If you think logic is an absolute?
The only absolute.