Timeline for How can intuitions be infallible?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 8, 2014 at 14:36 | comment | added | infatuated | Intuitions defined as direct, self-sufficient and infallible, they exclude any intermediary process (such as natural perception, or mental analysis) that would make the verifiability and infallibility of the act to be questionable and dependent on additional corroborating/certifying cognitive process. Perception of one's self happiness is an example. Once happy, one doesn't need any second thought or verification to feel it. The other way to define intuition is when the agent and object of perception are the same, as in feeling of happiness. When Joe feels that's because he simply is happy. | |
| Dec 8, 2014 at 14:25 | comment | added | infatuated | Moreover, to define intuition to include empirical perceptions is also self-undermining because it obscures the very distinction that is intended to be made between intuition and other forms of perceptions, and thus renders such categorization as pointless. | |
| Dec 8, 2014 at 14:21 | comment | added | infatuated | "There are also a priori intuitions, such as time and space. These are "Pure Intuitions" because they are not derivative--we do not experience time after or based on our sense experience." This is really not true. Our realization of time and space emerge after recurring, consecutive perceptions of the natural world which is essentially gradual and continuous. (See my discussion of Mulla Sadra's theory of time). This is only one of the wrongs in Kantian epistemology. | |
| Dec 6, 2014 at 5:21 | review | Late answers | |||
| Dec 6, 2014 at 15:44 | |||||
| Dec 6, 2014 at 5:04 | history | answered | FLprof | CC BY-SA 3.0 |