--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > How we intuit objects. What's relevant here is that space and time, > > rather than being real things-in-themselves or empirically mediated > > appearances are the very forms of intuition by which we must > > perceive objects. They are hence neither to be considered properties > > that we may attribute to objects in perceiving them, nor substantial > > entities of themselves. They are in that sense subjective, yet > > necessary preconditions of any given object so insofar as this object > > is an appearance and not a thing-in-itself. Humans necessarily > > perceive objects spatially and temporally. This is part of what it > > means for a human to cognize an object, to perceive it as something > > both spatial and temporal. > > > > A wild guess: Kant?
You win an autographed copy of Critique of Pure Reason. And kudos for beating all of these MIU philosophy majors to the punch.
