| Annotation Metadata
|
^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"T1bicttvw2","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ30Ӻ","startOffset":1377,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ31Ӻ","endOffset":414°Ӻ,"quote":"The processing of the raw material in Kant’s system is governed automatically by space and time (without which no experience would be possible) and the other categories which, for that very reason, are called a priori. The a priori, therefore, might be considered the technical description of the organism’s experiential capability. The a priori describes the framework within which such an organism operates, but it does not tell us what the organism does, let alone why it does it. “A priori” is tantamount to “built-in” or “innate,” and Kant’s justification of it leads, albeit in a roundabout fashion, to God and to a Platonic mythology of ideas. In that respect, Vico is more modern and more prosaic. Of the category of causality, for instance, he says: “If true means to have been made, then to prove something by means of its cause is the same as causing it.”Ӷ25Ӻ This notion (which has been rediscovered, no doubt without any knowledge of Vico, by the modern constructivist mathematicians) has, as Vico realized, a remarkably wide range of application. \nCauses thus originate in the putting together of individual elements; that is, they originate from an experiencer’s active operating, such that, for instance, “the determinate (i.e., causally determined) form of the object springs from the order and the composition of elements.”Ӷ26Ӻ Quite generally, that means that the world which we experience is, and must be as it is, because we have put it together that way.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°,^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°,^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°,^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°,^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°,^"jQuery32109168521032311262":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","category":"Argumentation2","data_creacio":1560440411485°
|
