Full Idea
Of the proposition that "all experienced events have causes", Descartes says this is analytic a priori, Hume says it is synthetic a posteriori, and Kant says it is synthetic a priori.
Gist of Idea
Is 'events have causes' analytic a priori, synthetic a posteriori, or synthetic a priori?
Source
J Baggini / PS Fosl (The Philosopher's Toolkit [2003], §4.01)
Book Reference
Baggini,J and Fosl,P.S.: 'The Philosopher's Toolkit' [Blackwells 2003], p.135
A Reaction
I am not sympathetic to Hume on this (though most people think he is right). I prefer the Kantian view, but he makes a very large claim. Something has to be intuitive.