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
    Valid a priori cognition is possible because both subject... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Valid a priori cognition is possible because both subject and object are determined by shared ontological principles that are structurally superior to both.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Knowledge requires at least a partial identity between subject and object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Partial identity between subject and object can be explained by shared ontological principles — categories — that determine both.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These categories are valid for both cognitive (epistemological) and ontological domains, grounding the partial overlap between them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant demonstrated that a priori cognition is grounded in the subject's own constitutive structures, not in mind-independent shared ontological principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Positing 'structurally superior' shared categories smuggles in a pre-critical metaphysical realism that begs the question against transcendental idealism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If categories are genuinely ontologically prior to both subject and object, we face a vicious regress: we need further cognitive access to those superior principles, requiring yet another grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's critique of the analytic-synthetic distinction undermines the special epistemic status of a priori cognition by dissolving the boundary between logical and empirical revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If all knowledge, including putatively a priori knowledge, is revisable under sufficient empirical pressure, then no shared ontological structure can guarantee the invariant validity Hartmann's account requires.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    If all knowledge, including putatively a priori knowledge, is revisable under su...If categories are genuinely ontologically prior to both subject and object, we f...Kant demonstrated that a priori cognition is grounded in the subject's own const...Knowledge requires at least a partial identity between subject and object.
    +4 moreShow less
    Partial identity between subject and object can be explained by shared ontologic...Positing 'structurally superior' shared categories smuggles in a pre-critical me...Quine's critique of the analytic-synthetic distinction undermines the special ep...These categories are valid for both cognitive (epistemological) and ontological ...

    Similar

    Synthetic a priori propositions can be objects of a priori intuitions.81%An a priori ground for the unity of subject and object in consciousnes...81%Warfield can justify a priori knowledge of premise 1 by virtue of the ...80%A third possibility exists: both representations and objects are deter...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: nicolai-hartmann
    View source passageHide passage
    Kant’s work inspired this stance on the relation between thinking and being, as we see in Hartmann’s sophisticated interpretation of Kant’s “supreme principle.” Readers will recall Kant’s principle: “the conditions of the possibility of experience in general must at the same time be the conditions of the possibility of the objects of experience” (Kant 1998 [1787], A158/B197). This was Kant’s attempt to formulate a universal basic principle for the relation between thinking and the world. For Kan
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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