a priori

since i brought it up in class yesterday, and it caused some confusion. I thought I would post something that would hopefully clarify the concept of a priori knowledge and how it could be argued that we as people have an a priori conception of what companionship, friendship, and connection with another entity is. If it doens'thelp clarify it, I'm sorry. I just felt bad that people were confused about it.

A PRIORI: is defined crudely as a proposition or concept that is knowable without experience of that proposition or concept. It is and inate knowledge about a given concept.

DICTIONARY DEFINITION: 1: a: deductive b: relating to or derived by reasoning from self-evident propositions — compare a posteriori c: presupposed by experience 2: a: being without examination or analysis : presumptive b: formed or conceived beforehand

But there are significant probelms with this. How can people have prior knowledge about some concept without actually having some sort of experience with it. But that is just my personal philosophical outlook on it.

Hopefully that cleared it up. If not I'd be happy to talk about it with anyone who wants to. And we can discuss how it relates to the human/animal distinction.

Also, I mentioned a biographic-novel in class. It's called "MAUS: a survivors tale" by:art spiegelman. It is a story about survial in the holocaust. It worth taking a look at. Not only because it is a dramatic moving story. But the author chracterizes the people in the story as the animals that could represent them. for example: jewish people are mice, germans are cats, americans are dogs, french people are frogs. It is an interesting book about the holocaust with important social commentary, and imagery. Check it out!