more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 9373

[filed under theme 12. Knowledge Sources / A. A Priori Knowledge / 8. A Priori as Analytic ]

Full Idea

The analytic theory of the apriority of logic arose indirectly, as a by-product of the attempt to explain in what a grasp of the meaning of the logical constants consists.

Gist of Idea

That logic is a priori because it is analytic resulted from explaining the meaning of logical constants

Source

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

Book Ref

-: 'Nous' [-], p.11


A Reaction

Preumably he is referring to Wittgenstein's anguish over the meaning of the word 'not' in his World War I notebooks. He first defined the constants by truth tables, then asserted that they were purely conventional - so logic is conventional.


The 13 ideas from 'Analyticity Reconsidered'

There are no truths in virtue of meaning, but there is knowability in virtue of understanding [Boghossian, by Jenkins]
Epistemological analyticity: grasp of meaning is justification; metaphysical: truth depends on meaning [Boghossian]
'Snow is white or it isn't' is just true, not made true by stipulation [Boghossian]
The a priori is explained as analytic to avoid a dubious faculty of intuition [Boghossian]
Could expressions have meaning, without two expressions possibly meaning the same? [Boghossian]
If meaning depends on conceptual role, what properties are needed to do the job? [Boghossian]
'Conceptual role semantics' says terms have meaning from sentences and/or inferences [Boghossian]
A sentence may simultaneously define a term, and also assert a fact [Boghossian]
Conventionalism agrees with realists that logic has truth values, but not over the source [Boghossian]
If we learn geometry by intuition, how could this faculty have misled us for so long? [Boghossian]
That logic is a priori because it is analytic resulted from explaining the meaning of logical constants [Boghossian]
We can't hold a sentence true without evidence if we can't agree which sentence is definitive of it [Boghossian]
We may have strong a priori beliefs which we pragmatically drop from our best theory [Boghossian]