Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that A concept whose sole cognitive work is performed by associative habit cannot be genuinely a priori in the relevant sense.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
A priori justification concerns reasoning relations, not causal origins; even habit-formed concepts can support non-experiential inferences.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Mathematical concepts like 'number' depend partly on associative learning yet support a priori reasoning about necessary truths.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim conflates psychological mechanism with epistemic status; how we acquire a concept doesn't determine what it can justify.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
A priori knowledge requires justification independent of experience; habit-based associations are learned through repeated experience.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Associative habits can be overridden or revised by new experiences, whereas genuine a priori truths are necessarily invariant.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If a concept's content depends entirely on contingent patterns of association, it lacks the universality constitutive of a priori knowledge.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.