2007-11-29 11:21:31 · 29 answers · asked by Link strikes back 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I agree, but with one exception: The principle of self-identity (which says "For all x, x=x") I think that is the only a priori truth.
2007-11-29 11:32:50 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Umm....depends at what point we become salf aware and whether our senses are extant before or after. I will say that I disagree, simply because we formulate new theories and thoughts independent of the senses.
My Latin is somewhat rusty folks, but I believe it means that there is nothing in the mind that was not previously in our senses. Or broadly speaking, all our ideas depend on sensory perception.
Depends which philosopher you follow.
I believe the argument is meant to run along the lines of, for theism "If all of our ideas are derived from the senses, and we have an idea of God, then we must somehow percieve God. Ergo he exists". A bit like Descartes trademark argument. Problem being, aside from Hume disproving it with his Shades of Blue thought experiment, we have original ideas not based entirely on the senses. Thats what science and art are. Also, we get told about God instead of intuiting him out of thin air, so the idea of his existance being proved by our conception of him falls flat. I can conceive of a smart George Bush.....doesn't make it so.
On a final note, and to get a bit existential, what about our minds perception of our mind? Does internal perception count as perception through senses, or do we perceive the mind also, relegating our entire thinking process into a series of impressions hurled at a unique perceptory viewpoint? Go Sartre..... Oooh, Catheis went for Leibniz. Kudos to you :D
2007-11-29 19:25:47 · answer #2 · answered by Rafael 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
(Latin, nothing in the intellect unless first in sense (the senses)) The guiding principle of empiricism, and accepted in some form by Aristotle, Aquinas, Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. Leibniz, however, added nisi intellectus ipse (except the intellect itself), opening the way to the view taken up by Kant, that the forms of reason form an innate structure conditioning the nature of experience itself.
2007-11-29 19:34:09 · answer #3 · answered by ccatheists 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I have created lots of things prius inintellectu deinde in sensu. Computer code is a good example.
2007-11-29 19:42:11 · answer #4 · answered by Someone who cares 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
nothing in the intellect unless first in sense (the senses).
This is the guiding principle of empiricism. Bring on the evidence for examination before belief.
I agree.
2007-11-29 19:31:12 · answer #5 · answered by CC 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
nothing in the mind unless previously sensed?
Do you mean the 5 physical senses, or supernatural senses such as spirit guides, the Holy Spirit, etc.
Or are you just trying to impress us with atinla :)
2007-11-29 19:30:13 · answer #6 · answered by Phillip H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agree. Nothing is going to be processed in the brain unless it is first perceived.
2007-11-29 19:25:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
man this is unfair... I have such a great answer
but I am a Spiritualist and you only asked for Christians and Atheists
* goes off in a huff *
2007-11-29 19:25:09 · answer #8 · answered by ☮ Pangel ☮ 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I will answer you very quickly!!!!! In the confines of the bible The only unforgiveable sin in the HOLY BIBLE there is only One Sin that is unforgivable. and that is to blaspheme the holy GHOST!! So. I warn you Never make that mistake!!!!
2007-11-29 19:49:31 · answer #9 · answered by ronboisit 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the science is still out on this one...I'm going to disagree for now.
2007-11-29 19:30:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋