Sensation that activates perception is the necessary condition for synthetic judgement, but not visa versa. Judgment can fail when perception is distorted, but not visa versa (as in the case of brain injury). Therefore sapience supervenes on sentience. Take that #Kant.
To have the power of reason means to be able to revise
one’s beliefs in light of reasons, or in other words, to be able to bring one’s beliefs under active existential control. But the grounding relations characteristic of perception lack this quality.
one’s beliefs in light of reasons, or in other words, to be able to bring one’s beliefs under active existential control. But the grounding relations characteristic of perception lack this quality.
Perceptual relations are not freely revisable, as optical illusions demonstrate: I may know my perception is inaccurate and yet be unable to correct it.
We are thus not active with respect to perception and the dispositional (bodily) motives which ground it. Of course, neither are we simply receptive: we must say that with regard to perception and its motives we are not active but spontaneous.
And Kant's failure to recognize the distinct characteristics and hierarchical (and evolutionarily emergent) relationship between perception (the sensible) and judgement (the intelligible) is why rationalists seem blind to competing logics (and worldviews).
Ultimately the failure to recognize the autonomy (and primacy) of perception leads to relatively closed terms of reference with regards to the plurality and adaptive fitness of different styles of communicative interaction.
“Science and philosophy have for centuries been carried along by the originary faith of perception. Perception opens onto things. This means that perception is oriented – as if toward its own end – toward a truth in itself in which the reason for all appearances is found...”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
