Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A priori ('from the earlier') and a posteriori ('from the later') are Latin phrases used in philosophy to distinguish types of knowledge, justification, or argument by their reliance on experience. A priori knowledge is independent from any experience. Examples include mathematics, [i] tautologies and deduction from pure reason.
A posteriori necessity existing would make the distinction between a prioricity, analyticity, and necessity harder to discern because they were previously thought to be largely separated from the a posteriori, the synthetic, and the contingent. [3] (a) P is a priori iff P is necessary. (b) P is a posteriori iff P is contingent.
In the Introduction to the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant contrasts his distinction between analytic and synthetic propositions with another distinction, the distinction between a priori and a posteriori propositions. He defines these terms as follows: a priori proposition: a proposition whose justification does not rely upon experience ...
The proposition "some bachelors are happy", on the other hand, is only knowable a posteriori since it depends on experience of the world as its justifier. [28] Immanuel Kant held that the difference between a posteriori and a priori is tantamount to the distinction between empirical and non-empirical knowledge. [29]
a posteriori: from the latter: Based on observation, i. e., empirical evidence. Opposite of a priori. Used in mathematics and logic to denote something that is known after a proof has been carried out. In philosophy, used to denote something known from experience. a priori: from the former: Presupposed independent of experience; the reverse of ...
a posteriori: from later An argument derived after an event, having the knowledge about the event. Inductive reasoning from observations and experiments. / ˌ eɪ ˌ p ɒ s t iː r i oʊ r aɪ / a priori: from earlier An argument derived before an event, without needing to have the knowledge about the event. Deductive reasoning from general ...
Sadra discussed Avicenna's arguments for the existence of God, claiming that they were not a priori. He rejected the argument on the basis that existence precedes essence, or that the existence of human beings is more fundamental than their essence. [30] Sadra put forward a new argument, known as Seddiqin Argument or Argument of the Righteous ...
Hume's strong empiricism, as in Hume's fork as well as Hume's problem of induction, was taken as a threat to Newton's theory of motion. Immanuel Kant responded with his Transcendental Idealism in his 1781 Critique of Pure Reason, where Kant attributed to the mind a causal role in sensory experience by the mind's aligning the environmental input by arranging those sense data into the experience ...