Arguing against the validity of reason - D'Souza - Kant

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

And what exercise might that be?

What the article fails to accept or credit, however, is that the multitude of changes occurring in the sum total of reality just at the moment the ball leaves the pitcher's hand are simply "unperceivable" to anyone through those same senses that let us track the reality of the ball in order to strike it .

As these realities are imperceptible they bear no relevance to the stated 'reality', surely?

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

The enlightenment's faith in the believe that the universe could be "solved" through the use of our limited means to perceive it was, at best, naive.

That was then, this is now. We have so many advances that allow us to measure the previously immmesurable that I think they can be considered correct-ish.