Differentiating what Kant's synthetic a priori exactly is

[dce]

According to Kant's synthetic a priori what differences would lie between intelligent design AND certain interpretations of physical principles such as, but not limited to, multiple universe ideas? and
Does Kant's reasoning even hold water when comparing the two?

IMO, it does apply and no inherent difference, in regards to the general label as a synthetic a priori, exists. And though Kant had an obvious different social context then we experience, the problem he was addressing is one in the same to the problems we face in light of finding the parameters of mathematically modeling the entirety of existence. I realize that the latter of the previous sentence is subject to progression of science, but with singularities cropping up in very, for lack of a better word, intriguing places a shift of science back into the realm of philosophy seems to be becoming more and more necessary through the past few decades. Or is this thought just a part of a process of understanding the information we are receiving from our scientific instruments and the time it takes to sink into public awareness? I'm sure that there are many flawed ideas everywhere, but I would really appreciate some sort of feedback.

 

[arildno]

By Kant, synthetic a priori statements are true for any particular experience, because they simply contain a correct assessment of the effect a human being's pre-existing mental structure has on the actual exprience itself (rather than those elements of experience being generated by external stimuli).