Earlier today I got an email message saying a new PM had arrived but, if it got sent, I didn’t receive it. So, if you were expecting a reply, better try again.
Same thing happened to me. Maybe it was a glich in the system that sent random email notifications to random people or it was somebody trying to PM us and nothing happened.
I think it’s fine as far as it goes…but shouldn’t you consider adding something like the following?
On the other hand, with regard to our cognition in respect of its mere form (excluding all content), it is equally manifest that logic, in so far as it exhibits the universal and necessary laws of the understanding, must in these very laws present us with criteria of truth. Whatever contradicts these rules is false, because thereby the understanding is made to contradict its own universal laws of thought; that is, to contradict itself. These criteria, however, apply solely to the form of truth, that is, of thought in general, and in so far they are perfectly accurate, yet not sufficient. For although a cognition may be perfectly accurate as to logical form, that is, not self-contradictory, it is notwithstanding quite possible that it may not stand in agreement with its object. Consequently, the merely logical criterion of truth, namely, the accordance of a cognition with the universal and formal laws of understanding and reason, is nothing more than the conditio sine qua non, or negative condition of all truth. Farther than this logic cannot go, and the error which depends not on the form, but on the content of the cognition, it has no test to discover.
Fair enough. And I’ve considered it. But really, if I’d go that far, I’d like to take the next step, reference the Organon and call the general logic dialectic. Just a thought, of course.
Well if this keeps up any longer, I’ll have no choice but to quote extensively from the Antique of Pure Treason. After all, the transcendental unity of apperception, being, as we all know, dependent upon, yet strictly and formally a necessary conditon for, the form of inner intuition, that is to say, time, not as it is in itself, but as it necessarily appears to us, forms a purely contingent unity, yet one which is nonetheless a priori. For irritably, I say unto you, if fish could fly they would be flying fish, and would therefore be the unconditioned condition of their own existence, self subsistent yet persistent, infernal but sempeternal, casting doubt not merely on fish shops but on the very idea of conditionality itself.
We’re all just copying and pasting (well, not Wombat, but he’s a professional). I don’t want to speak for cskinner, but I certain don’t have a clue what I’m talking about.
