Apriorism

Google+

Google+

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

The facts should be allowed to test principles. (44) (of truth my add).

To start with the principles from the first (a priori) and to use them for the basis for accepting or rejecting facts is the 'wrong way around'. (44).

The fallacy of apriorism. (44).

The author explains that too much primacy is given to principles so that they might not be modified by what is observed. (44).

Is other words, principles are not allowed to be modified by observable evidence and facts.

Unwarranted presumptions are rejecting relevant evidence and facts. (44).

The author cites 'My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with the facts.' (45).

Not only could many religious persons be accused of holding such an approach but many non-religious persons as well....

Pirie wisely writes that this fallacy is 'unproductive' (45). Facts and truth being dismissed.

Vancouver

Louis P. Pojman explains that the term a priori comes from the Latin “preceding” and is knowledge that is not based on sense experience but is innate or known to human beings by the meanings of words and definitions. Pojman (1996: 595).

Arthur Pap defines a priori knowledge as being independent of experience. Pap (1973: 666).

Simon Blackburn notes that a proposition is knowable a priori if it can be known without experience of a certain set of events in the actual world. Blackburn allows for some experience to be obtained in order for a priori knowledge to occur. Blackburn (1996: 21). He explains that this type of knowledge is very controversial and it is not clear how pure thought without the use of experience can lead to any true knowledge at all. Blackburn (1996: 21). Some empiricists have attempted to deny that any real knowledge can be obtained from a priori means. Blackburn (1996: 21).

Pojman writes that a posteriori comes the Latin “the later” and is knowledge that is obtained from human sense experience only, as in the five senses. Pojman (1996: 595).

Blackburn reasons that something can be known a posteriori when it cannot be known a priori. Blackburn (1996: 21-22).

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) ‘A priori/A posteriori’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, p. 21-22. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973) (eds), ‘A priori knowledge: Introduction’, A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.