Sleepyhead wrote:
Well having read the Critique of Pure Reason I can honestly say that I
don't really 'get' Kant's philosophy - I'm more Wittgenstein oriented
myself. But, to return to the argument at hand ...

The problem I have with George's post doesn't lie with the content, but
with what George thinks that content proves. As a piece of creative
writing, for instance, it reads interestingly enough. But prophecy or
science!? I would say it's neither of those, although clearly George
wishes it were both!


We get 3 dimensional personality from 3 dimensional space? And, from
this, we can deduce God?

I'll stick with Kant.

Kant doesn't talk about "God" but he does explain that space/time does
not exist in our percepts but is, instead, necessary for them.
Therefore, we are using time/space to order the percepts . . . for our
viewing.

If space/time are an intuitive procedure then we exist in a
singularity. Phenomena gush out from this -- central area -- but not
into space and time, but in space/time order for viewing.

There is, moreover, a layered cake of ordering. First, there is an
original synthetic unity of apperception, i.e., that from which the
possible percepts come. Then, there is our manifold of experience
which is our ordering of what is possible.

In religious terms, we have here an analysis explaining God, soul, and
experience. It also shows that each is just an extension of the other.


tomcat