more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 16989

[filed under theme 12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 1. Nature of the A Priori ]

Full Idea

A priori is supposed to mean something which can be known independently of experience, …but possible for whom? God, or the Martians? …Instead of 'a priori truth' it is best to stick to whether some person knows it based on a priori evidence.

Gist of Idea

Rather than 'a priori truth', it is best to stick to whether some person knows it on a priori evidence

Source

Saul A. Kripke (Naming and Necessity lectures [1970], Lecture 1)

Book Ref

Kripke,Saul: 'Naming and Necessity' [Blackwell 1980], p.34

A Reaction

[compressed] This is Kripke's famous attempt to establish that 'a priori' is strictly an epistemological term, and should not be taken as a term of metaphysics (or modal semantics?). I definitely prefer the Kripke view, though it downgrades the a priori.

The 22 ideas with the same theme [nature of knowledge acquired by pure thought]:

11239 The notion of a priori truth is absent in Aristotle [Aristotle, by Politis]
20784 There are non-sensible presentations, which come to us through the intellect [Stoic school, by Diog. Laertius]
9156 Kant's shift of view enables us to see a priority in terms of mental capacity, not truth and propositions [Burge on Kant]
7575 A priori knowledge is limited to objects of possible experience [Kant, by Jolley]
12414 A priori knowledge occurs absolutely independently of all experience [Kant]
9351 One sort of a priori knowledge just analyses given concepts, but another ventures further [Kant]
21476 A priori propositions are those we could never be seriously motivated to challenge [Schopenhauer]
9158 For Frege a priori knowledge derives from general principles, so numbers can't be primitive [Frege]
8259 Kripke has breathed new life into the a priori/a posteriori distinction [Kripke, by Lowe]
16989 Rather than 'a priori truth', it is best to stick to whether some person knows it on a priori evidence [Kripke]
4947 A priori truths can be known independently of experience - but they don't have to be [Kripke]
6982 Long arithmetic calculations show the a priori can be fallible [Jackson]
16892 Is apriority predicated mainly of truths and proofs, or of human cognition? [Burge]
12390 A priori knowledge comes from available a priori warrants that produce truth [Kitcher]
9333 A priori belief is not necessarily a priori justification, or a priori knowledge [Horwich]
20471 Epistemic a priori conditions concern either the source, defeasibility or strength [Casullo]
20477 The main claim of defenders of the a priori is that some justifications are non-experiential [Casullo]
3306 The clearest a priori knowledge is proving non-existence through contradiction [Benardete,JA]
20298 The traditional a priori is justified without experience; post-Quine it became unrevisable by experience [Rey]
9128 It is propositional attitudes which can be a priori, not the propositions themselves [Sorensen]
9130 Attributing apriority to a proposition is attributing a cognitive ability to someone [Sorensen]
4645 'A priori' does not concern how you learn a proposition, but how you show whether it is true or false [Baggini /Fosl]