Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori
This thesis studies whether there is a tenable distinction between a priori justification and a posteriori justification. My research considers three possible conceptions of a priori: (1) Justification Independent of Experience, (2) Mere Meaning Based Justification and (3) Justification by Rational...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Others |
Language: | en |
Published: |
Digital Commons @ Lingnan University
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://commons.ln.edu.hk/philo_etd/10 https://commons.ln.edu.hk/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=philo_etd |
id |
ndltd-ln.edu.hk-oai-commons.ln.edu.hk-philo_etd-1009 |
---|---|
record_format |
oai_dc |
spelling |
ndltd-ln.edu.hk-oai-commons.ln.edu.hk-philo_etd-10092019-11-02T15:16:51Z Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori CHAN, Hiu Man This thesis studies whether there is a tenable distinction between a priori justification and a posteriori justification. My research considers three possible conceptions of a priori: (1) Justification Independent of Experience, (2) Mere Meaning Based Justification and (3) Justification by Rational Insight, and examines whether they can provide a sound and significant distinction between a priori and a posteriori. This thesis contains five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the background knowledge of the a priori/a posteriori distinction. Chapter 2 analyzes the traditional conception of a priori, i.e. justification independent of experience, and considers whether the distinction based on it is tenable. Five approaches for defining “experience” are examined, but none of them succeed in providing a distinction between a priori and a posteriori. Chapter 3 focuses on the empiricist conception of the a priori, i.e. a priori as mere meaning based justification, and argues that the distinction based on it has a problem of classification. Chapter 4 concerns the rationalist conception of the a priori, i.e. a priori as justification by rational insight, and argues that neither the idea of justification by rational insight itself nor the distinctive features of rational insight could provide a distinction between a priori and a posteriori. Given that none of the current major accounts seem to work, we should not be optimistic about the potential for success in accounting for the distinction between a priori and a posteriori. In the last chapter, I will conclude the thesis and point out the implication of abandoning the a priori/a posteriori distinction: a need to reform our understanding of the nature of different sources of justification and knowledge. 2014-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://commons.ln.edu.hk/philo_etd/10 https://commons.ln.edu.hk/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=philo_etd Theses & Dissertations en Digital Commons @ Lingnan University Philosophy |
collection |
NDLTD |
language |
en |
format |
Others
|
sources |
NDLTD |
topic |
Philosophy |
spellingShingle |
Philosophy CHAN, Hiu Man Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
description |
This thesis studies whether there is a tenable distinction between a priori justification and a posteriori justification.
My research considers three possible conceptions of a priori: (1) Justification Independent of Experience, (2) Mere Meaning Based Justification and (3) Justification by Rational Insight, and examines whether they can provide a sound and significant distinction between a priori and a posteriori.
This thesis contains five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the background knowledge of the a priori/a posteriori distinction. Chapter 2 analyzes the traditional conception of a priori, i.e. justification independent of experience, and considers whether the distinction based on it is tenable. Five approaches for defining “experience” are examined, but none of them succeed in providing a distinction between a priori and a posteriori. Chapter 3 focuses on the empiricist conception of the a priori, i.e. a priori as mere meaning based justification, and argues that the distinction based on it has a problem of classification. Chapter 4 concerns the rationalist conception of the a priori, i.e. a priori as justification by rational insight, and argues that neither the idea of justification by rational insight itself nor the distinctive features of rational insight could provide a distinction between a priori and a posteriori. Given that none of the current major accounts seem to work, we should not be optimistic about the potential for success in accounting for the distinction between a priori and a posteriori. In the last chapter, I will conclude the thesis and point out the implication of abandoning the a priori/a posteriori distinction: a need to reform our understanding of the nature of different sources of justification and knowledge. |
author |
CHAN, Hiu Man |
author_facet |
CHAN, Hiu Man |
author_sort |
CHAN, Hiu Man |
title |
Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
title_short |
Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
title_full |
Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
title_fullStr |
Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
title_sort |
is there a distinction between a priori and a posteriori |
publisher |
Digital Commons @ Lingnan University |
publishDate |
2014 |
url |
https://commons.ln.edu.hk/philo_etd/10 https://commons.ln.edu.hk/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=philo_etd |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT chanhiuman isthereadistinctionbetweenaprioriandaposteriori |
_version_ |
1719285834933338112 |