Hacker News Reader

I like Kants work, but it has always bugged me, how he defined the 12 Kantian categories of a priori knowledge that just are. It feels inelegant. I'd much rather have a generalisation of all a priori knowledge instead of a defined list.

View on HN

Every system has arbitrary hard-coded constants deep down in its bowels somewhere. Why should the foundation of all knowledge be any different?

What if the hard-coded constants were a trinity? What if we called them the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?

(I believe in Mythos, Logos and Ethos. Ask me about metamodernism.)

He tried to be cutesy and show how an enumeration of the criteria for these categories form "judgments" which define the categories themselves, essentially suggesting that this is likely to work since the analytical domain fundamentally involves self-consistency.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com