Logical & Critical Thinking

with Professor Logic

A Priori Knowledge

January 11, 2012

A priori Definition

A priori is a philosophy term used to describe a type of knowledge. A priori means “from the earlier”, but this is kind of obvious because it sounds like the word “prior”. A priori knowledge is something you can figure out on your own with no research. A priori knowledge needs no investigation to justify or use  it as a position in an argument. A priori is knowledge gained from other knowledge that was in turn gained through sense data. It is really just a technical definition meant to explain away 100% empiricism which says ALL knowledge must be experienced.

A Priori Example

“All fathers have a child” is a statement that is a priori. We know that a man is a father when he has a child. This statement is known without having to actively investigate. What’s more is with this knowledge even if you had to gain it through experience you can deduce other pieces of knowledge from it alone without having to experience anything.

This seems so obvious right? Well it’s time to go deeper…

…A Priori Knowledge, Deeper

In order to analyze a piece of data and figure out it’s a priori is actually an a priori process in itself. Let’s go back to the prior example. ”All fathers have a child”, actually needs prior knowledge gained by experience. One must experience the sense data of of birth or parenthood to understand the concept. The mental process we possess to understand this is actually the a priori knowledge we seek.

Logical Absolutes and A Priori Knowledge

There is a set of logic laws that are a priori. They exist as part of the brains base utility . These are the logical absolutes:

  • Law of identity -> A thing is what it is and not what it is not
  • Law of Excluded Middle -> A thing is either true or false but not both
  • Law of Non-Contradiction -> Two opposing statements cannot both be true

These formulate a strong base for rummaging through sense data and appropriating it in such a way as to formulate opinions and beliefs about the world. Is there something even deeper?

More A Priori Knowledge?

To know the logical absolutes we have to be able to identify a thing. Identifying a thing is a priori knowledge in its process, we can see something, some object, and then we can know the object. This is essential in being able to state that this object is what it is and it’s not what it’s not. This a priori knowledge is the knowledge of objects not in details alone but the knowledge to be able to know an object. The knowing is a priori and this forms the basis of “feeling” or “experiencing” existence.

Now on to Kant

Immanuel Kant was the philosopher that invented the term to define knowledge garnered from pure knowledge. This is not to say that all knowledges source isn’t in the material world. In fact he admits or argues that all knowledge originates from sense data, it’s just that some knowledge is created from other knowledge in turn gained from experience.

 

  • http://www.facebook.com/yesitsjake Jacob Anderson

    Consider: your definition of knowledge is wrong
    Imagine: A possible world in which the number one is called something else, or an infinite set of possible worlds in which the number one is known as something infinitely different than what you know it as now
    Consider: In each of these worlds, the number one exists (not necessarily as the ‘number one’, but the concept of “one” i.e. one object within temporal space)

    With this in mind, imagine a person with no sight or hearing. This person will create objects within their mind (what type of objects they create is not relevant) If the person creates more than one object and wishes to define the number of objects which exist, they will bring into existence the concept of “one” or “two” (although they would not call it “one” or “two”)

    Therefore the ability to conceive of numbers exist as a priori knowledge

    Possible counter arguments (CA) and responces (R)@

    (CA)- the person is incapable of creating a conceptual idea or object
    (R) – Yes they can, there is a study to back this up which I will find tomorrow (i want to go to sleep but feel that i have to put your freshman style argument to sleep)

    (CA)- The ability to group numbers together, or conceive of numbers, is not knowledge
    (R)- Numbers are knowledge

    You have not defeated a priori knowledge any more than I have defeated Dragonforce on expert (seriously that shit is hard)

    Also I typed this in up 5 minutes and its 2:35am where I live, im really tired and my girlfriend is shouting at me to go to sleep

    bitch.

    • Joseph Leon

      “With this in mind, imagine a person with no sight or hearing. This person will create objects within their mind (what type of objects they create is not relevant) If the person creates more than one object and wishes to define the number of objects which exist, they will bring into existence the concept of “one” or “two” (although they would not call it “one” or “two”)”

      I would go further and imagine a person that is born and formed with none of the senses, no hearing, sight, taste, touch, smell; No senses whatsoever. What object is this person going to conceive? I hypothesize that this person would be incapable of knowledge because of the lack of sense data. Thus, numbers would be rendered unknowable and not in the realm of a priori knowledge.

      A number is the identification of an object and the assignment of a word or label to that object. A single object in English is assigned a label of 1. If another object is added the group is labeled 2.

      Interested in hearing about the study that says that people with zero sense data can formulate object identification.