Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Doolittle
There's nothing irrational about positing evidence of things that transcend our ability to observe them naturally.
|
I'm not disagreeing with this, all I'm asking is for you (or anyone else) to give me some reason to believe in something which transcends my ability to understand it. You keep pointing out that reason and science are not exhaustive, but that's not what I'm arguing for. You're saying that there's something else, I'm saying fine, what is it?
Quote:
|
Kant's critique is practically a summation (and expansion) of everything I've said. The concept is that naturalistic reasoning is subject to inherent limitations, and that it is not our only means of understand ourselves and our world.
|
Insofar as I've understood it, it says exactly the opposite. Reason does have inherent limitations, but it
is indeed our only means of understanding ourselves and our world and it's preposterous to conceive of understanding something outside of our categories.