more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 9369

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

Full Idea

Isn't it overwhelmingly obvious that 'Either snow is white or it isn't' was true before anyone stipulated a meaning for it, and that it would have been true even if no one had thought about it, or chosen it to be expressed by one of our sentences?

Gist of Idea

'Snow is white or it isn't' is just true, not made true by stipulation

Source

Paul Boghossian (Analyticity Reconsidered [1996], §I)

Book Ref

-: 'Nous' [-], p.4

A Reaction

Boghossian would have to believe in propositions (unexpressed truths) to hold this - which he does. I take the notion of truth to only have relevance when there are minds around. Otherwise the so-called 'truths' are just the facts.

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]