A Logical Proof for the Cognitive Capability of Judgment

By

Anthony J. Fejfar, B.A., J.D., Esq., Coif

© Copyright 2009 by Anthony J. Fejfar

The Philosopher Comte argued for Logical Positivism where Logical Positivism

is defined as the use of deductive logic and sense experience. Comte was trashed by

Hume who said that you can only know sense experience through the use of inductive

reasoning and the empirical method. Kant trashed Hume arguing that meaning

categories at Level 2 or the Noumenal World are all that you can really know not sense

experience at all. Deveopmental Psychologists following Lonergan agree that at the age

of One children no longer really gave sense experience but only experience the world of

meaning or noumenal world. The Gadamer developed Hermenuetic arguing once again

that the World of Meaning at the Hermeutic Level of Level 2 is all we really know. The

Habermas argued that Hermeutics doesn’t because there is no transcendent vantage point

to critique any hermeneutic meaning which is not already a hermeutic stance, thus

leading to the notion of analytic spin or the hermeneutic circle which logically invalid.

Lonergan argued that we avoid the hermeutic circle because we use Level 3 Intuitive

Judgment to break out of the hermeutic circle and form reasonable probable judgments of

fact. Therefore:

1. We assume that we have reasonable knowledge of the world around us.

2. reason is not sense experience

3. reason is no mere analytic understanding which involves the hermeneutic

circle
4. therefore reason involves a transcendent function known as Intuitive Judgment

5. I experience experience, understanding, and judgment above

6. I understand experience, understanding, and judgment above

7. I judge that I know reality, reasonably, through experience, understanding, and

judgment.

8. Therefore, Judgment Exists.