This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Argumentative theory of reason.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Argumentative theory of reason.

User Info: mrplainswalker

6 years ago#41
It still sounds like you're just restating "brain in a vat."

Everything is subject to our perceptions. Hence, we can't know the "true" nature of anything..."true" meaning without being warped by our perception.
Failure to at least give this show a chance gives anyone you see the right to punch you in the face.
- Spiritclaw on Battlestar Galactica

User Info: Adito99

6 years ago#42
Prove it? So mayhaps that isn't an elegant way to may a point, but think about it.

"Proof" is term that only has meaning if you accept reasoning.

"Mayhaps" at first I thought this was not a real word but google thinks otherwise. Anyway, this term communicates a certain probability judgment. One meant to show uncertainty. Certainty and uncertainty and both things that require reason.

"Isn't" is simply a negation and is a basic building block of reason.

Finally, you encourage me to think about it but have only given a nearly perfect example of circular reasoning. What would you like me to say about it? That it's true? That would mean nothing to you. Should I say it's possibly true? This would also mean nothing to you. All of these terms require reasoning.

Consequently, the concept of transcendental idealism must also conform to the structure of the mind, rendering it unknowable. But if you consider carefully, this causes a bit of a duck loop, since each new conclusion, by consequence, invalidates itself (including this conclusion, hence the difficulty I've been eluding to.)

This is a big reason why many contemporary philosophers reject all forms of idealism (including Kants). To speak of the anything, including the structure of our reasoning is to speak of something that truly exists. It's nonsense to speak of some further structure of our structure of considering structures. This regress never ends.
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind
  1. Boards
  2. Religion
  3. Argumentative theory of reason.

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived