| | Dan,
"So you do have a point, Dr Sedden, but how do you square your own interpretation with the difficulties mentioned above?"
Well, remember, I'm not claiming that Kant got it right--in most of my posts, I'm just trying to get clear on what he said. That said, I find the first paragraph unexceptional--the mind is a processor and all knowledge is processed knowledge. That's something that even Objectivism can agree with.
The second paragraph lays out a whole bunch of problems that would have to be settled once we agree on what Kant said. And that may take long.
There are some things in the second paragraph that I disagree with. For example,
"To the extent that knowledge depends on the structure of the mind and not on the world, knowledge would have no connection to the world and is not even true representation, just a solipsistic or intersubjective fantasy."
Seeing 'red' depends on the structure of my eye, but that doesn't mean that "red' has nothing to do with reality.
Fred
|
|
