English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I wrote:

How do we visualize something that is a independent of experience?

How do we visualize green for example without ever seeing it? We can describe it through language but we would never have that subjective and indescribable experience of seeing green for the first time and explaining what it is after. Same goes for mathematical objects. And let's say Modular Functions which even professors have a hard time explaining. How do we even explain what a modular function is to a person who doesn't understand the language of mathematics? We can explain it in the simplest terms but will possibly stop and say it can't be explained easily. That's because we don't have the perception of a mathematician or we don't have the perception to see what green looks like. We could explain it in thousands of words and still not have the simplest clue.

They wrote:

I'm not really sure what the question is getting at-- the question title speaks of the a priori, yet the text of the question uses examples (like the color green) that are clearly a posteriori. And are we really speaking of "visualizing" without "seeing", or about indirect knowledge in general? Finally, is the OP actually arguing that it is impossible to teach things to people?

I really need help I've did this to the best of my ability , will someone help me?

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by Mitch, kiamlaluno, simchona, Matt E. Эллен, aedia λ Mar 6 '12 at 20:20

Questions on English Language & Usage Stack Exchange are expected to relate to English language and usage within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

Is there a philosophy stackexchange yet? – Sam Mar 6 '12 at 18:17
@Sam philosophy.stackexchange.com – Mitch Mar 6 '12 at 18:29
What exactly is the question here? – Mitch Mar 6 '12 at 18:30
What do you mean , it's at the top – David Mar 6 '12 at 18:35
@David: 1- your title question is "How do I improve on this question from the suggestion given?", 2- the question at the top of the comment is completely different "How do we visualize something that is a independent of experience?", and 3- this has absolutely nothing to do with English. It's a very interesting question, just not on-topic here at EL&U. – Mitch Mar 6 '12 at 20:06

Color for instance is deeply bound up with our physical experience and perception of the world.


However, color terms are not. There are plenty of languages without a term for 'green', for instance, and even at least one language without any color terms at all.

There's no non-metaphoric evidence for "a priori knowledge"; there's little enough for a posterori.

Protagoras got it right: Παντων μετρον ανθρωπος ‘Man is the measure of all things.’ I.e, the only thing all humans have in common is a human body.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.