David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
International Journal of Philosophical Studies 7 (2):173 – 188 (1999)
Some recent discussions of a priori knowledge, taking their departure from Kant's characterization of such knowledge as being absolutely independent of experience, have concluded that while one might delineate a concept of a priori knowledge, it fails to have any application as any purported case of such knowledge can be undermined by suitably recalcitrant experiences. In response, certain defenders of apriority have claimed that a priori justification only requires that a belief be positively dependent on no experience. In this paper, I begin by showing how the exchange of arguments between the disputants comes down, in the end, to no more than a display of conflicting intuitions. I shall then provide a diagnosis explaining how our explication of a priori justification depends on our standards for applying the term 'a priori' with this, in turn, reflecting our prior intentions as to whether we are willing to allow the existence of such warrants. I shall further argue that the claim that such knowledge can be affected by subversive experience is not entirely compatible with the spirit of apriority. Finally I conclude by making some methodological remarks about the prospects of a positive characterization of a priori knowledge by comparing it to the concept of knowledge.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Alvin Plantinga (1993). Warrant and Proper Function. Oxford University Press.
Saul Kripke (2010). Naming and Necessity. In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Philosophy. Routledge 431-433.
Philip Kitcher (1983). The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge. Oxford University Press.
Bob Hale (1988). Abstract Objects. B. Blackwell.
Robert Audi (1983). Foundationalism, Epistemic Dependence, and Defeasibility. Synthese 55 (1):119 - 139.
Citations of this work BETA
Hamid Vahid (2003). Externalism, Slow Switching and Privileged Self-Knowledge. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):370-388.
Similar books and articles
Tuomas E. Tahko (2008). A New Definition of A Priori Knowledge: In Search of a Modal Basis. Metaphysica 9 (2):57-68.
Christian Helmut Wenzel (2003). Knowledge, Belief, and the A Priori. Contributions of the Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society 11:369-370.
M. C. Dillon (1987). Apriority in Kant and Merleau-Ponty. Kant-Studien 78 (1-4):403-423.
Tuomas E. Tahko (2011). A Priori and A Posteriori: A Bootstrapping Relationship. Metaphysica 12 (2):151-164.
Hartry Field (2005). Recent Debates About the A Priori. In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology. OUP Oxford
Jason S. Baehr, A Priori and a Posteriori. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Jennifer Nagel (2000). The Empiricist Conception of Experience. Philosophy 75 (293):345 - 376.
Derk Pereboom (1990). Kant on Justification in Transcendental Philosophy. Synthese 85 (1):25 - 54.
Pat Manfredi (2000). The Compatibility of a Priori Knowledge and Empirical Defeasibility: A Defense of a Modest a Priori. Southern Journal of Philosophy 38 (S1):179-189.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #71,428 of 1,911,838 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,984 of 1,911,838 )
How can I increase my downloads?