How far is pure knowledge from the empiricist?

It is the experience we have and we are developing in our lives that allows us to harvest different types of knowledge, knowledge that we learn empirically, and others that are forged in schools and universities. Several reasons make me think about so many things of human knowledge, among these I have tried to analyze several things, which lead me to clear questions such as:

Where can the first faculties of acquiring knowledge begin to awaken?

Image source

We need a source external to our environment that awakens and moves that fundamental motor that awakens our senses, our senses are the fundamental basis to begin to know through representations the ability to obtain our first sources of intellect.

Time is not the variable of our lives that intervenes more directly in our knowledge, the experience we accumulate is thanks to time, since almost never any knowledge that is prior to our multiple experiences is fundamentally superior to the knowledge that it reaps in the most precious cluster of our experiences. It is from a high degree of maturity that the experience gives us the optimal starting point that causes knowledge to emerge and start from that moment.

It is necessary to think, that it is true that all or part of our knowledge begins with experience, not necessarily by that circumstance all our knowledge must come from experience in our lives.

Being able to diagnose from my thoughts the natural sources that feed our knowledge, makes me reflect on the fact that it is a question that requires deep investigation in several aspects that in my opinion depend on our thoughts, these are:

• Is there knowledge that is proportional to our experience?

Image source

• How much has the human being advanced in discovering all his senses?
  
  Image source

All the knowledge that emerges as a result of subsequent experience is subject to a mode of improvement to give rise to knowledge that differs from a pure knowledge, but which in turn links everything harvested by the induction of philosophical knowledge that has transcended to teach men about the importance of learning to know (knowledge).

Human knowledge reaches a crucial point where everything we learn a priori will take place in an independent way from any experience obtained, it is a full knowledge then that will be achieved not with a specific experience, but with the totality of experiences of our lives . This form of human knowledge has its counterpart and differences in all that empirical knowledge, that is, to all that can only be achieved a posteriori, more specifically by the experience obtained by each one of us.

With the above, we can ask ourselves then: where does all those "pure" knowledge come from?

I think that if we can achieve the formula to obtain knowledge where no form of empirical learning is mixed, then I could say that it is in my opinion pure knowledge. Let's analyze the following example:

"The saying that all change has its original cause, is a saying a priori, even more is not pure, because the change is a concept which can only be taken from the experience."

"He concluded by saying that there are no barriers or distances that separate and differentiate human knowledge, what does exist is different ways of expressing and acquiring knowledge, a total that both infers in that a knowledge has features of purity in any comparison whatsoever, or that we learn it by simple vital senses of living.The important thing is to learn at every moment what life in its essence allows us to do."