Kant wasn’t wrong about our innate sense of geometry. Our innate sense of geometry is Euclidean. At least, you can’t say that it isn’t—because the error of our innate representation is MUCH larger than the difference between Euclidean geometry and the Universe’s geometry.
A mushy intuition that is equally consistent with a lot of geometries, including Euclid’s, is not an intuition of Euclidean geometry. Beside, Euclid’s 5th postulate was long considered problematic. How innate is that?
Kant wasn’t wrong about our innate sense of geometry. Our innate sense of geometry is Euclidean. At least, you can’t say that it isn’t—because the error of our innate representation is MUCH larger than the difference between Euclidean geometry and the Universe’s geometry.
A mushy intuition that is equally consistent with a lot of geometries, including Euclid’s, is not an intuition of Euclidean geometry. Beside, Euclid’s 5th postulate was long considered problematic. How innate is that?