more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 16889

[filed under theme 12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 4. A Priori as Necessities ]

Full Idea

If it is possible to derive a proof purely from general laws, which themselves neither need nor admit of proof, then the truth is a priori.

Gist of Idea

A truth is a priori if it can be proved entirely from general unproven laws

Source

Gottlob Frege (Grundlagen der Arithmetik (Foundations) [1884], §03), quoted by Tyler Burge - Frege on Apriority (with ps) 1

Book Ref

Burge,Tyler: 'Truth, Thought, Reason (on Frege)' [OUP 2001], p.359

A Reaction

Burge brings out the contrast with Kant, for whom a priori truths are derived from particular facts, not general ones.

The 19 ideas with the same theme [a priori knowledge is an insight into necessary truths]:

2279 A triangle has a separate non-invented nature, shown by my ability to prove facts about it [Descartes]
2602 What experience could prove 'If a=c and b=c then a=b'? [Descartes]
5012 'Nothing comes from nothing' is an eternal truth found within the mind [Descartes]
9344 Mathematical analysis ends in primitive principles, which cannot be and need not be demonstrated [Leibniz]
9155 An a priori proof is independent of experience [Leibniz]
5404 Two plus two objects make four objects even if experience is impossible, so Kant is wrong [Russell on Kant]
9345 Propositions involving necessity are a priori, and pure a priori if they only derive from other necessities [Kant]
16893 The apriori is independent of its sources, and marked by necessity and generality [Kant, by Burge]
9347 A priori knowledge is indispensable for the possibility and certainty of experience [Kant]
9352 An a priori truth is one derived from general laws which do not require proof [Frege]
16889 A truth is a priori if it can be proved entirely from general unproven laws [Frege]
16894 An apriori truth is grounded in generality, which is universal quantification [Frege, by Burge]
5397 The rationalists were right, because we know logical principles without experience [Russell]
5198 We could verify 'a thing can't be in two places at once' by destroying one of the things [Ierubino on Ayer]
9354 Why should necessities only be knowable a priori? That Hesperus is Phosporus is known empirically [Devitt]
19565 How could the mind have a link to the necessary character of reality? [Devitt]
20472 Analysis of the a priori by necessity or analyticity addresses the proposition, not the justification [Casullo]
14712 A sentence is a priori if no possible way the world might actually be could make it false [Chalmers]
9369 'Snow is white or it isn't' is just true, not made true by stipulation [Boghossian]