[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 304 KB, 793x529, 1601230750012.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16862741 No.16862741 [Reply] [Original]

Let's assume I've never had a perception of a vagina. Is my knowledge of the vagina's holeness an impure synthetic a priori, if I deduce it from the stickness of my pp and the feeling of my sexual drive? You could argue that I came through my mother's, but what if you turn it around and ask about the stickness of pp as a girl? You wouldn't know how it looks, but you can be pretty sure how it's supposed to function.

>> No.16862768

>>16862741
have sex

>> No.16862851

This is a decent question, if improperly framed.

>> No.16862860

>>16862741
this is what lack of pussy does to mf

>> No.16862971

>>16862741
Analytic a priori: vagina is a girl hole. Definition. Subject means the same thing as the predicate. Cannot be false without obtaining contradiction.
Synthetic a priori: intuitions of space and time, through which all empirical observations about holeness and pps obtain a relational structure and are subsumed under the pure concepts of the understanding.
Synthetic a posteriori: pp is sticky. Subject does not mean the same thing as the predicate, proposition is only true by means of empirical observations connected through spacetime. pp can be both sticky and non-sticky without logical contradiction, hence a posteriori.

>> No.16863915
File: 49 KB, 69x120, 1592555587057.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16863915

>>16862741
>Is my knowledge of the vagina's holeness an impure synthetic a priori
I think Kant would say that it's synthetic a posteriori production of imagination. You're using your imagination, which draws on reproducing experience from perceptions. So, you have the experience of having a pp, and you also have the experience of having your pp in your hand, as well as holes and bodies in general.

The problem with calling this a priori knowledge is that it's not really knowledge, it's an estimate. Also, a Deleuzean critique of identity subordinating difference here is important to consider. When you have a perception of a vagina, it will only perception of that particular vagina. Your knowledge of the category vagina will not be perfect or complete, because you're not getting at the identity, just a repetition of different vaginas.

>> No.16863995

>>16862741
Holes don't exist, therefore vaginas don't exist