Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The very idea of synthetic a priori judgments is a contra... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The very idea of synthetic a priori judgments is a contradiction in terms.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Meaning is exhausted by verification conditions, so any genuinely informative judgment must be empirically testable (Ayer, Language Truth and Logic).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Judgments that are necessarily true independent of experience cannot add factual content, making 'synthetic a priori' a category that satisfies neither condition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's indeterminacy of translation shows no principled boundary between analytic and synthetic judgments exists, dissolving the distinction Kant's framework requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a stable analytic/synthetic distinction, 'synthetic a priori' collapses: apparent cases like '7+5=12' are either revisable empirical posits or disguised analytic truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Kantian intuition is inductive and only yields concepts, never propositions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Axioms and propositions are analytic judgments constructed deductively from concepts
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language2 linked

    Related

    Axioms and propositions are analytic judgments constructed deductively from conc...Judgments that are necessarily true independent of experience cannot add factual...Kantian intuition is inductive and only yields concepts, never propositionsMeaning is exhausted by verification conditions, so any genuinely informative ju...
    +2 moreShow less
    Quine's indeterminacy of translation shows no principled boundary between analyt...Without a stable analytic/synthetic distinction, 'synthetic a priori' collapses:...

    Similar

    Axioms are not synthetic a priori judgments90%Axioms are necessary truths but not based on synthetic a priori judgme...81%The synthetic a priori laws of pure natural science are themselves 'de...80%Transcendental claims may be synthetic a priori, placing them between ...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: stumpf
    View source passageHide passage
    In the critical part of his work, Stumpf raises the problem of the origins of the laws and principles of logic and mathematics as follows: if these principles are inductive in nature, as Mill believes them to be, then they do not constitute necessary truths; if, on the contrary, they are necessary truths, then the question arises as to whether they are synthetic a priori judgments as Kant claims or analytic a priori propositions as Stumpf claims. Against Mill, Stumpf argues that the axioms are n
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit