[hist-analytic] Frrom AUNE: Analytic and A Priori

steve bayne baynesrb at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 18 17:14:44 EDT 2009


I think I would agree with Bruce on this. As long as thinking is experienced,
as it must be for the Cogito to go through, the knowledge of the fact that
we think is not a priori. We shouldn't forget that by 'a priori' we mean
according to Kant something that is universal; but knowledge of my
own existence is neither universal, nor for that matter necessary. We 
could abandon Kant and come up with our own definitions; but, then, 
we wander about in the wilderness to my way of thinking.

Regards

Steve






________________________________
From: Bruce Aune <aune at philos.umass.edu>
To: Danny Frederick <danny.frederick at tiscali.co.uk>
Cc: hist-analytic at simplelists.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:10:59 PM
Subject: Re: Frrom AUNE: Analytic and A Priori

I think you misunderstood my point about knowing that "I think" is true.  I did not mean I know this sentence is true by thinking, as I know "2 + 2 = 4" by thinking.  I meant that I know "I think" is true only because I am aware of some episode of thinking that I do--because, to put it differently, I have experience of myself thinking.  This is what makes the knowledge a posteriori.  Of course, if you want to classify this knowledge as a priori, you may certainly do so; but that will be one place where our conceptions of a posteriori and a priori diverge.

Best, Bruce
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rbjones.com/pipermail/hist-analytic_rbjones.com/attachments/20090318/51cb1bd6/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the hist-analytic mailing list