THE NEW WINE
229
perience , and an equivalence
of statement .
It may be
a postulation of our egoity , but it therefore
need not
necessarily
be
so
for
all
other
personalities
,
as
it
cannot
be
in
any way demonstrated
as
final
.
Kant
did not have the necessary
knowledge
of
taking into
consideration
the
fact
of
inherited
experiences
,
as
Herbert Spencer
was
able
to
do
,
so
worked
at
a
dis
advantage
,
postulating
an
à
priori
in
place
of
organ
iged intuitions
.
CROWLEYANITY
AND THE
PROLEGOMENA
To illustrate the infolding
of
Crowleyanity
,
it
will
be
necessary
here
to
run through Kant's Prolegomena
,
reducing his arguments
to
the terms
of
this
all
embrac
ing philosophy
.
(
To
aid
the
reader
,
I
will place
all
criticisms
of
a
purely
Crowleyan
savour
in
square
brackets
.
)
Immanuel
Kant
finding
his
master
David Hume
enmeshed
in
the negative
net
of
an
excessive Pyrrhon
ism
,
set out
to
free him
from
the tangled
conception
of
cause
.
To accomplish
this end
,
and
to
avoid falling
into the same entanglement
of
empirical
uncertainties
(
physical
),
groping about
in
the dark for some weapon
which might enable him
to
free his unfortunate
master
,
himself fell into the same metaphysical
pitfall
,
and
tented
himself
by
declaring his strangling
senior
as
“
free
.”
In
other
words
:
“
It
(
the
source
of
meta
physical
knowledge
)
consists
,
then
,
in
knowledge
à
priori
,
that
is,
knowledge derived
from
pure
under
standing
,
pure
reason
(p
.
11
).”
[
Then
it
is
im
con
1
These
are the words
of
Crowley
,
the student
.
2
Bohn's
edition
of
the Prolegomena
.