There’s no “prior” to the priors, thus the priors are actually posteriors, and follow from habit and not anything deductively necessary. Habit always evades cri

There’s no “prior” to the priors, thus the priors are actually posteriors, and follow from habit and not anything deductively necessary. Habit always evades critique, as it explains itself. Thus, we will be forced, ceaselessely, to think in the same ways, just with differing parameters.