Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The very idea of synthetic a priori judgments is a contradiction in terms.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Kantian intuition is inductive and only yields concepts, never propositions
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Axioms and propositions are analytic judgments constructed deductively from concepts
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
2 perspectives
Reason against 1 of 2
?
1.
Meaning is exhausted by verification conditions, so any genuinely informative judgment must be empirically testable (Ayer, Language Truth and Logic).
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason against 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.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
?
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.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42