Dear dover, I have seen Lewn reaction at your post and assumed
that he was your ''target'', That is the consequence of unclear
reference . I even considered to involve Kant in our discussion
with his distinction between ''pure reason'' and ''experience'' in
order to explain ''the base'' or ''essence'' of mathematics. Anyway
my intention was to proclaim logic as ''pure reason'' and defend
my friend lew as ''pure thinker'' who ''only reacted '' at statements
of others and not at their ''experience''. This way I would put you
by the ''empiricist '' (knowledge based on experience) and Lew
as ''theoretical thinker'' based on ''pure reason'' (grin). This would
be my ''way out'' from the difficult position to chose between
two persons which I both like.
that he was your ''target'', That is the consequence of unclear
reference . I even considered to involve Kant in our discussion
with his distinction between ''pure reason'' and ''experience'' in
order to explain ''the base'' or ''essence'' of mathematics. Anyway
my intention was to proclaim logic as ''pure reason'' and defend
my friend lew as ''pure thinker'' who ''only reacted '' at statements
of others and not at their ''experience''. This way I would put you
by the ''empiricist '' (knowledge based on experience) and Lew
as ''theoretical thinker'' based on ''pure reason'' (grin). This would
be my ''way out'' from the difficult position to chose between
two persons which I both like.