On 7/6/2013 9:50 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote: > "fom" <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote in message > news:urednfGmS_X9uUXMnZ2dnUVZ_gydnZ2d@giganews.com... >> On 7/6/2013 6:20 AM, Julio Di Egidio wrote: >>> "fom" <fomJUNK@nyms.net> wrote in message >>> news:QrGdnSwFF7s95krMnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> >>>> Still, there are few choices: >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma >>>> >>>> Take your pick: circularity, infinite regress, or meaningless syntax. >>> >>> Oh, come on, those are the choices for the mindless rationalist only. >> >> Perhaps. >> >> Suppose one merely imposes a constraint upon >> "knowledge" in so far as it be "objective". > > Merely?
Sure. Why not? That had been the criterion by which Kant attempted to reconcile Humean skepticism.
That happens to be the historical reference that most closely agrees with apoorv's sense of the matters relating the universal quantifier to infinity. He did not understand the reference when I posted it. But that is not a problem.
> >> There are an indeterminate number of choices >> for subjective knowledge. Its limits lie >> with the imagination of the individual. > > There are as many sensibilities as there are individuals, but one and > only one rationality: only the sceptics and the liars deny that. >
Is it representable? There are now many logics. Either the unique rationale is representable or it is not (like the "realist" bivalence?). If it is representable, then it has already been represented or it has yet to be represented. If it has been represented, by what criteria does one recognize its canonical form? If it has not been represented, how can we know? Will we be able to recognize it when it is represented?
Disregarding all of that, what is your sense of the one rationality?
>> But, what of knowledge in the objective >> sense? > > I so I believe, that ultimate knowledge is not subjective, although it > is not "objective" in the usual sense either: the comprehension of > cosmos is more of a spiritual adventure, then, among other things, a > rational endeavour. >