[ 5/6/20 – Facebook – foundationas of logic group – A priori metaphysics. ]
A priori is a nonsense in a very real sense.
The idea that we should trust something without reference to experience is something that people who want to control others and stop them questioning and testing for themselves often promote.
The essences of science, and the fundamental basis of freedom, is the ability to test conjectures in reality, and to evaluate the evidence for oneself. Any less than that is dogma and control.
Any attempt to foist anything “a priori” is a direct challenge to freedom and independence; and I strongly advise rejecting it in favour of evidence based evaluation.
And my position does acknowledge that it seems very probable that all understanding is some sort of simplification of the complexity that seems to reside in reality, and is therefore “wrong” in some senses, and “useful” in other senses. This seems likely to be eternally the case – reality does seem to be sufficiently complex for that to be so. The processes of the scientific method seem to be the most effective method of becoming less wrong over time.
And it does get exceptionally complex at multiple levels, as often the time bound demands for action place very real limits on the complexity of the models we are able to use in any particular situation, often demanding that we simplify infinities of complex uncertainties down to simple binaries like right/wrong, true/false, friend/foe, danger/opportunity.
Very rarely is reality that simple, but often we don’t have the luxury of time or energy or processing capacity to admit of it being any more complex.