Back Ache, Gas Pains, Acid Indigestion, Loose Bowels, or did you "just get 
up on the wrong side of the rock"?

http://www.jstor.org/pss/20516110
http://books.google.com/books?id=GQxAAAAAIAAJ&q=t.v.+fleming&dq=t.v.+fleming&hl=en&ei=8pQJTvesHOm30AHs1NF8&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA
Foundations of Philosophy was the first book on philosophy which I read, in 
seventh grade to expand my vocabulary. I am a plagiarist, as I have said 
elsewhere. Do you give a list of references for everything which you think, 
citing book title and author? So far as I know, my sole contribution to 
philosophy is a succinct statement "information alters consciousness" given 
in 2001, a paraphrase of long winded discourses.
On second thought, this one regarding the art of blacksmithing/forging might 
also be relevant, given in 2007 "When iron spends enough time between the 
hammer and anvil, it turns to steel."

Lonnie Courtney Clay


On Tuesday, June 28, 2011 1:11:39 AM UTC-7, georges wrote:
>
>
> --- On Mon, 6/27/11, Lonnie Clay <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant
> I quote"Kant asserts that experience is based both upon the perception of 
> external objects and a priori knowledge.[30] The external world, he writes, 
> provides those things which we sense. It is our mind, though, that processes 
> this information about the world and gives it order, allowing us to 
> comprehend it. Our mind supplies the conditions of space and time to 
> experience objects. According to the "transcendental unity of apperception", 
> the concepts of the mind (Understanding) and the perceptions or intuitions 
> that garner information from phenomena (Sensibility) are synthesized by 
> comprehension. Without the concepts, intuitions are nondescript; without the 
> intuitions, concepts are meaningless—thus the famous statement, "Thoughts 
> without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."[31]
>
> "Don't see the connection with what I just wrote?  
> ============
> Sure I see. I see that
>
> 1.Wikipedia wisdom is as usually that of a kitchen almanac for village 
> idiots.
>
> 2.That "Kant's Epistemology" is a wrong title. It should say
> "Lonnie's intimate secrets".
>
> Georges.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/epistemology/-/Y0U549aw6pwJ.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

Reply via email to