Element contents
Series: Elements in Epistemology
The A Priori without Magic
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 September 2022
Summary
The distinction between the a priori and the a posteriori is an old and influential one. But both the distinction itself and the crucial notion of a priori knowledge face powerful philosophical challenges. Many philosophers worry that accepting the a priori is tantamount to accepting epistemic magic. In contrast, this Element argues that the a priori can be formulated clearly, made respectable, and used to do important epistemological work. The author's conception of the a priori and its role falls short of what some historical proponents of the notion may have hoped for, but it allows us to accept and use the notion without abandoning either naturalism or empiricism, broadly understood. This Element argues that we can accept and use the a priori without magic.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in EpistemologyOnline ISBN: 9781009030472Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 13 October 2022
References
Alston, William P. (1988). “The Deontological Concept of Epistemic Justification.” Philosophical Perspectives 2: 257–299.Google Scholar
Bealer, George. (2000). “A Theory of the A Priori.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 81(1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beebe, James R. (2009). “The Abductivist Reply to Skepticism.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79(3): 605–636.Google Scholar
Benacerraf, Paul. (1973). “Mathematical Truth.” Journal of Philosophy 70(19): 661–679.Google Scholar
Bennett, Jonathan. (1971). Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berry, Sharon. (2019). “External World Skepticism, Confidence and Psychologism about the Problem of Priors.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 57(3): 324–346.Google Scholar
Blackburn, Simon. (1984). Spreading the Word: Groundings in the Philosophy of Language. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Boghossian, Paul. (2000). “Knowledge of Logic.” In Boghossian, Paul and Peacocke, Christopher (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 229–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boghossian, Paul. (2001). “How are Objective Epistemic Reasons Possible?” Philosophical Studies 106: 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boghossian, Paul. (2003). “Blind Reasoning.” Proceeding of the Aristotelian Society: Supplementary Volume 77: 225–248.Google Scholar
Boghossian, Paul. (2020a). “Do We Have Reason to Doubt the Importance of the Distinction between A Priori and A Posteriori Knowledge? A Reply to Williamson.” In Boghossian and Williamson (eds.), Debating the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 137–155.Google Scholar
Boghossian, Paul. (2020b). “Intuition, Understanding, and the a Priori.” In Boghossian and Williamson, Debating the a Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 186–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boghossian, Paul and Peacocke, Christopher, eds. (2000). New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boghossian, Paul and Williamson, Timothy. (2020). Debating the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bonjour, Laurence. (1980). “Externalist Theories of Empirical Knowledge.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 5: 53–73.Google Scholar
Bonjour, Laurence. (1998). In Defense of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, Darren. (forthcoming). “Objective Bayesianism and the Abductivist Reply to Scepticism.” Episteme.Google Scholar
Burge, Tyler. (2000). “Frege on Apriority.” In Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 11–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelen, Herman. (2012). Philosophy without Intuitions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1937). The Logical Syntax of Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1950). “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology.” Revue Internationale de Philosophie 4(11): 20–40.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1962). Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Casalegno, Paolo. (2004). “Logical Concepts and Logical Inferences.” Dialectica 58: 395–411.Google Scholar
Casullo, Albert. (2003). A Priori Justification. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chisholm, Rodrick. (1977). “The Truths of Reason.” In Theory of Knowledge, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall: 34–61.Google Scholar
Coffa, J. Alberto. (1991). The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap: To the Vienna Station. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colyvan, Mark. (2006). “Naturalism and the Paradox of Revisability.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87(1): 1–11.Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel. (1976). “Are Dreams Experiences?” Philosophical Review 85(2): 151–171.Google Scholar
Einheuser, Iris. (2006). “Counterconventional Conditionals.” Philosophical Studies 127(3): 459–482.Google Scholar
Evans, Gareth. (1979). “Reference and Contingency.” The Monist 62(2): 161–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, Hartry. (1994). “Disquotational Truth and Factually Defective Discourse.” Philosophical Review 103(3): 405–452.Google Scholar
Field, Hartry. (1996). “The A Prioricity of Logic.” Proceeding of the Aristotelian Society: New Series 96: 359–379.Google Scholar
Field, Hartry. (1998). “Epistemological Nonfactualism and the A Prioricity of Logic.” Philosophical Studies 92(1/2): 1–24.Google Scholar
Field, Hartry. (2000). “Apriority as an Evaluative Notion.” In Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 117–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, Hartry. (2005). “Recent Debates about the A Priori.” In Gendler and Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology, Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 69–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. (1981). “The Present Status of the Innateness Controversy.” In RePresentation: Philosophical Essays on the Foundations of Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press: 257–316.Google Scholar
Fodor, Jerry A. (1983). The Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, James. (2001). “Resurrecting Logical Probability.” Erkenntnis 55(2): 277–305.Google Scholar
Friedman, Michael. (2000). “Transcendental Philosophy and A Priori Knowledge: A Neo-Kantian Perspective.” In Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 367–383.Google Scholar
Gentzen, Gerhard. (1964). “Investigations into Logical Deduction I.” American Philosophical Quarterly 1(4): 288–306.Google Scholar
Gentzen, Gerhard. (1965). “Investigations into Logical Deduction II.” American Philosophical Quarterly 2(3): 204–218.Google Scholar
Gettier, Edmund L. (1963). “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” Analysis 23(6): 121–123.Google Scholar
Gibbard, Allan. (1990). Wise Choices, Apt Feelings: A Theory of Normative Judgment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. (1979). “What is Justified Belief?” In Pappas (ed.), Justification and Knowledge. Dordrecht: D. Reidel: 1–23.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. (1999). “A Priori Warrant and Naturalistic Epistemology: The Seventh Philosophical Perspectives Lecture.” Philosophical Perspectives 13: 1–28.Google Scholar
Gray, Jeremy. (1989). Ideas of Space: Euclidean, Non-Euclidean, and Relativistic, 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Harman, Gilbert. (1986). “The Meanings of Logical Constants.” In Lepore (ed.), Truth and Interpretation: Perspectives on the Philosophy of Donald Davidson. New York: Blackwell: 125–134.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, John. (2002). “Deeply Contingent A Priori Knowledge.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 65(2): 247–269.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, John. (2007). “A Priority and Externalism.” In Goldberg (ed.), Internalism and Externalism in Semantics and Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 201–218.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1945). “On the Nature of Mathematical Truth.” American Mathematical Monthly 52(10): 543–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, Eli and Warren, Jared. (2019). “Quantifier Variance.” In Kusch (ed.), Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Relativism. London: Routledge: 349–357.Google Scholar
Huemer, Michael. (2009). “Explanationist Aid for the Theory of Inductive Logic.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60(2): 345–375.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Carrie. (2008). Grounding Concepts: An Empirical Basis for Arithmetical Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David. (1989). “Demonstratives.” In Almog, Petty, and Wettstein, (eds.), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 481–564.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. (1984). The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul A. (1980). Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Leite, Adam. (2011). “Austin, Dreams, and Scepticism.” In Gustafsson, and Sørli, (eds.), The Philosophy of J.L. Austin. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 78–113.Google Scholar
Maher, Patrick. (2006). “The Concept of Inductive Probability.” Erkenntnis 65: 185–206.Google Scholar
Malmgren, Anna-Sara. (2006). “Is There A Priori Knowledge by Testimony?” Philosophical Review 115(2): 199–241.Google Scholar
Malmgren, Anna-Sara. (2013). “A Priori Testimony Revisited.” In Casullo and Thurow (eds.), The A Priori in Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 158–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maudlin, Tim. (2005). “The Tale of Quantum Logic.” In Ben-Menahem (ed.), Hilary Putnam. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 156–187.Google Scholar
Maudlin, Tim. (2007). The Metaphysics Within Physics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Maudlin, Tim. (2012). Philosophy of Physics: Space and Time. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Nozick, Robert. (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Peacocke, Christopher. (2000). “Explaining the A Priori: The Programme of Moderate Rationalism.” In Paul Boghossian and Christopher Peacocke (eds.), New Essays on the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 255–285.Google Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin. (1993). Warrant and Proper Function. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. (1968). “Is Logic Empirical?” In Cohen and Wartofsky (eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science Vol. 5. Dordrecht: Reidel: 216–241.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. (1976). “‘Two Dogmas’ Revisited.” In Ryle (ed.), Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy. Stocksfield: Oriel Press: 202–213.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. (2005). “A Philosopher Looks at Quantum Mechanics (Again).” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56(4): 615–634.Google Scholar
Quine, Willard V. (1951). “Two Dogmas of Empiricism.” Philosophical Review 60(1): 20–43.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. (1951). The Rise of Scientific Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Schleidt, Wolfgang, Shalter, Michael D., and Moura-Neto, Humberto. (2011). “The Hawk/Goose Story: The Classical Ethological Experiments of Lorenz and Timbergen, Revisited.” Journal of Comparative Psychology 125(2): 121–133.Google Scholar
Shope, Robert K. (1983). The Analysis of Knowing: A Decade of Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sidelle, Alan. (1989). Necessity, Essence, and Individuation: A Defense of Conventionalism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Sider, Theodore. (2011). Writing the Book of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sklar, Lawrence. (1974). Space, Time, and Spacetime. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Sosa, Ernest. (1996). “Rational Intuition: Bealer on its Nature and Epistemic Status.” Philosophical Studies 81: 151–162.Google Scholar
Turri, John. (2011). “Contingent A Priori Knowledge.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83(2): 327–344.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2015a). “Conventionalism, Consistency, and Consistency Sentences.” Synthese 192(5): 1351–1371.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2016). “Internal and External Questions Revisited.” Journal of Philosophy 113(4): 177–209.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2017). “Epistemology versus Non-Causal Realism.” Synthese 194(5): 1643–1662.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2018). “Change of Logic, Change of Meaning.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 96(2): 421–442.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2020). Shadows of Syntax: Revitalizing Logical and Mathematical Conventionalism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (2021). “Defending Understanding-Assent Links.” Synthese 199(3–4): 9219–9236.Google Scholar
Warren, Jared. (forthcoming). “Inferentialism, Conventionalism, and A Posteriori Necessity.” Journal of Philosophy.Google Scholar
Williamson, Jon. (2010). In Defence of Objective Bayesianism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (1986). “The Contingent A Priori: Has it Anything to Do with Indexicals?” Analysis 46(3): 113–117.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2000). Knowledge and its Limits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2013). “How Deep is the Distinction between A Priori and A Posteriori Knowledge?” In Casullo and Thurow (eds.), The A Priori in Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 291–312.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2016). “Knowing by Imagining.” In Kind and Kung (eds.), Knowledge through Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 113–123.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2020a). “Reply to Boghossian on Intuition, Understanding, and the A Priori.” In Boghossian and Williamson, Debating the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 208–213.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy. (2020b). “Reply to Boghossian on the Distinction between the A Priori and the A Posteriori.” In Boghossian and Williamson, Debating the A Priori. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 156–167.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. (1929). “Some Remarks on Logical Form.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 9: 162–171.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. (1956). Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin. (1986). “Inventing Logical Necessity.” In Butterfield, Jeremy (ed.), Language, Mind & Logic. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge: 187-209.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin. (2006). “Inventing Logical Necessity.” In Butterfield (ed.), Language, Mind, & Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 187–209.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: Unknown
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this element is currently unknown
and may be updated in the future.
- 20
- Cited by