@kennethamy,
kennethamy;146616 wrote:I suppose the answer is that there is no such necessary relationship. And we know that because we know that before there were human beings there were objects like the Moon and the stars.
If you are going to assert that some particular thing posesses independent existence then aren't you denying the natural processes that are logically necessary for their coming-to-be?
Isn't the moon obviously connected in time by a natural process that points beyond it? a necessary connection between it and the other natural objects?
It seems the moon can't have independent existence if we are to here identify it as a natural object. It must rest upon a prior natural process. And this process will ever be the very same natural process that the development of human minds also depends upon.
The question is, how do we prove that our knowledge is certain - ?
Because you are guilty of maintaining an unnatural independence of objects, one from another, you are much further away from fulfilling the criteria for certitude.
The moon didn't spring forth at once out of the infinities of time and space; and the very potential for the creation of human minds did not likewise spring out of an infinity of chaos. The natural potential for the creation of human minds is not purely accidental but must be related to the same natural processes as those that formed the moon. How could you distinguish between the two?