tfw youve no a priori reason to trust me

Comments

  • imagei will watch the heck outta this pumpkin patch
    well he's not wrong
  • IN THIS WORLD IT'S MILK OR BE MILKED
    he just Kant do it
  • vtkvtk
    embrace the confusion
    Random Latin phrases confuse me, like de facto, a priori, expecto patronus, et cetera...
  • kill living beings
    you can replace "a priori" with "prior" here and it's basically the same

    at least that's how i read it. with kant the only thing you'd have a priori reason to trust would be god, or something, probably
  • Eternity is a child playing, playing checkers; the kingdom belongs to a child.
    No, the existence of God can only be given via practical reason, not a priori pure reasoning as classical philosophy tried to do is what Kant would say
  • kill living beings
    well there you go then. trust nobody not even nobody
  • I've learned to tolerate drama...except on the boat
    vtk said:

    Random Latin phrases confuse me, like de facto, a priori, expecto patronus, et cetera...

    De facto = for all intents and purposes
  • IN THIS WORLD IT'S MILK OR BE MILKED
    ad infinitum
  • imagei will watch the heck outta this pumpkin patch
    de facto is a legal term, though, which technically means 'in practice, but not by right' and has developed the informal usage by extension

    i think the dialogue in the OP sounds funny because they're trying to do the same thing with 'a priori', presumably meaning the thing Klino said, except nobody actually uses that term that way, so it brings to mind the specialized Kantian usage which is out of place
  • edited 2018-04-10 01:01:25
    kill living beings
    I mean, it is Witcher 3, it could be Kant


  • imagei will watch the heck outta this pumpkin patch
    perhaps

    maybe this line was delivered in the midst of a discussion of the ontology of trust or something, i would need context to judge fairly
  • Eternity is a child playing, playing checkers; the kingdom belongs to a child.
    He's not

    Though because he's basically Satan, if you had some kind of reverse ontological argument, that would be an a priori reason to distrust him
Sign In or Register to comment.