can a priori propositions
                      pre- or pro-          requisite
       a confined
   entity of
     a posteriori
                presuppositions?
just watched
a "boxing match"
     with jordan peterson
sparring with
         matt dillahunty...
    and i'm...
                    sort of: "bothered"...
a priori would imply
the prefix: pre-,
            rather than pro-....
            while a posteriori would
imply the prefix: pro-,
       rather than pre-....
          hence the confusing
state of affairs of: to propose -
versus -
                           to suppose...
divergent timing -
              to have made one's writing
axiomatic...
            or rather:
                      maxim **** -
****!
     custard pie's worth of
the cranium sponge that is the brain...
how can something...
   ah!
            to will it onto others!
hence the a priori proposition...
and the a posteriori presupposition....
i'm schizoid-bilingual... what?!
it would make sense
to have, or at least embody
a priori: presuppositions...
         given that a- priori
would leave you ontologically intact
with propositions, i.e.: a-:
                        without a prior to...
so what the ****, are maxims
investing in...
            can't exactly grip a "present"
with them...
given the a priori propositions
   & a posteriori presuppositions
scenario of the sparring contest
i'm referring to...
              then the next tier:
   if there is such a "thing"
as articifial intelligence...
       then there is analytical &
                   synthetic counterpaarts...
     guess we'll have to adapt to
playing the synthetic intelligence role
now...
             given that the artificial
"thing"...
                      requires more
analysis, than those of us with
    ensuring a synthetic transition
              occurs have to plough across
                               the digital mind-field.
sorry... what are maxims
exactly?
          is this where we call
believers conservatives...
                        and soothsayers:
regurgitators of "truths"
                                             the liberals?
oh! ****!
   pre-suppositions,
        that's not exactly akin to
pre-positions?
   but isn't a supposition already a pre-
example?
         soup contra supper...
       did i miss
          the inter-mediating prepositions?

they're already there!
         in variant grammatical
categorisation...
                           e.g. the point...
       albeit that's a definite article
in italics...
                    it's also a preposition...
huh?
                 ein da!
                            pre through to pro:
     there!
                               where?
               so much for the subsequent
sein...
              
     can a supposition have
    a pre-suppositional
form?
   akin to a proposition, a maxim:
having a form that's: truth?

what the hell
                     is a presumption then?!
or... pre-cognition?
        bog standard adjective
circus...
                   like sharpening
a knife: although reduced
to stabbing someone with
                                  a blunt object...

so:

                            propositions,
               prepositions,
  presuppositions
  and suppositions that
  fold back into "pro"positions...

back and forth...
                   all those in favour
of the aye motion say aye:       93...
  and all those in favour
      of the nay motion say nay: 107...

a good day's offering:
  that much, i've already gathered.