REASON, INTUITION AND INSTINCTS

The concepts of "a priori" and " a posteriori" can easily be replaced by theories of reason, intuition, physical instincts and the fact that our ideas of the truth come from our sense-impressions of experiences of objective physical reality as well as the fact that our DNA has information contained in it also. The truth as in knowledge corresponding to known facts of reality are mostly objective truths with a minor amount being subjective truths. When I mention that truth is mostly objective I mean to suggest that it exists irrespective of the influence of human beings, but human beings interpret the truth subjectively and then call it either subjective or objective truth. All of our ideas concerning the truth which are not subjective come from our sense-impressions which we have received from the objective physical world around us. Truths are not self-made realizations already formed within us because our ideas of the truth in the sense of "a priori ideas" are a combination of the ideas from our sense-impressions, or sense-data and the information that exists in our DNA combined with reason. The information in our DNA appears to be able to process the information from our sense-impressions or sense-data with the aid of our faculty of reason. It is a common misconception that a priori ideas are the same as innate ideas, or inner truths, because human beings do not have innate ideas, or ideas of the truth from an inner place, our ideas of the truth come from our sense-impressions of the objective physical reality around us. This ability to process, and store information within us from the objective physical reality around us occurs because of reason and the information in our DNA, and this process, and ability is called the faculty of "understanding".
It is obvious that without the cognitive, and retention abilities of our minds, and our brain to retain knowledge from our sense-data then our faculty of understanding would not have any real use and would be a superfluous faculty. A posteriori ideas are simply the ideas of the truth that we have from our experiences of the objective physical reality around us that we have received through our sense-impressions as sense-data, and it is the knowledge of the objective truth of physical events, and processes, and facts without any subjective influence on our part. Any truths, or ideas of truth which are purely subjective within us are only minor experiences which occur within the temporary truth of our experiences, and include things like original thinking, or ideas, etc. Our instincts, and our logical intuition are part of our physical form and DNA make-up and are partly responsible for our a priori ideas. Many philosophers in the past have tried to apply mystical, or hidden meanings to basic truths, or processes within matter, and reality, and are for example, that we have innate ideas, that we have a spirit, or soul, or that our souls transmigrate from body, to body, or that a priori ideas are due to some inner knowledge due to previous lives etc. Modern philosophers have to make a stand and accept that the truth is simpler, and more obvious than many of the philosophers in the past thought it was. There should be no room in modern philosophy for delusion, and fantasy. Modern philosophy should be a rigorous exercise of attaining to the truth of reality by the verification of simple, clear, logical, certain, and straightforward propositions, and statements. Statements that are verifiable should be "self-evidently true" in the sense of being logical, and rational, and statements should also be "empirically provable, and reproducible", or a combination of both empirically provable, and self-evidently true. Our physical form, and energy, or matter aswell as its processes within space, and time generally gives us all the answers to our questions, and the answers we seek do not need to be found in fantasy, or the mystical. Imagination is only useful in thought experiments based on reality, otherwise our imagination becomes fantasy, and delusion and leads us astray away from the truth, and this is never a good thing except in literature, or film. Metaphysical concepts, or ideas which are not verifiable are usually erroneous, and are useless as ideas in philosophy. Only metaphysical concepts, or ideas which stand the test of verification can be regarded as useful as working concepts, and ideas within philosophy, but this usually occurs if these concepts, or ideas can be adapted, and explained in such a way as to become useful to philosophers. Concepts, and ideas in philosophy are not static things but should be adaptable, and progressive to suit the times. A priori ideas, and knowledge consists of conclusions of things that exist in the cosmos that we have, and have not experienced directly through our senses, and is not limited to only our senses, and memory. A priori ideas, and knowledge is based on our senses, intuition, instinct, rational tendencies, understanding, memory, and will, etc. Einstein knew the speed of light is more constant than different frames of reference and never changes whereas frames of reference do vary. Einstein knew the speed of light is constant whereas frames of reference do vary because it is an a priori idea which has nothing to do with the experiences of our senses, einstein had to intuit this conclusion by using logic, and his instincts as well as using mathematics. Immanuel kant wanted to know how human beings could have synthetic a priori knowledge such as the kind that you find in geometry, and in logical ideas, for example, it is true that synthetic a priori truths and knowledge are not necessarily empirical but yet we can have them due to a combination of our instincts, intuition, logic, reason, and also because certain empirical a posteriori ideas contribute to these synthetic a priori modes of knowledge also. Instinct, intuition, logic, and reason are faculties and abilities that we already have in our DNA make-up due to millions of years of evolution and so it is our natural inclination, and ability to know these synthetic a priori modes of knowledge as being part of the truth of reality. Some people have opposed Locke's denial and refutation of the innate ideas concept by claiming that he was wrong because in nature we see some things that contradict his theory of a blank sheet of paper (or tabula rasa), for example, some people claim that pigeons have innate knowledge and ideas of some kind. Pigeons we all know when blindfolded and taken to a new location and relaeased know how to fly back home. The problem with the example of a pigeon having innate knowledge is that it is a flawed proposition to begin with; this is because a pigeon cannot be given knowledge of specific routes from certain locations to other locations as knowledge before they were born. Pigeons know where to go to fly home through sheer instinct and intuition; this instinct and intuition exists and comes from all the millions of years of evolutionary information that is stored up within their DNA make-up. Any knowledge or ideas that a pigeon may have of where to go to fly home springs from its instincts and intuitions and not the other way around.