What is a priori knowledge?
Knowledge independent of or prior to sensory experience.
Innate knowledge is the idea that certain knowledge, ideas, or concepts are inborn rather than acquired through sensory experience. Key arguments supporting this include:
Empiricists like John Locke denied innatism: All ideas come from experience, categorized by these core concepts:
Descartes emphasized clear and distinct ideas as the hallmark of certain knowledge accessible to reason alone:
Empiricists often challenged Descartes' foundational premises and deductions:
Hume’s Fork: David Hume’s Fork distinguishes between relations of ideas (analytic, a priori) and matters of fact (synthetic, a posteriori).
What is a priori knowledge?
Knowledge independent of or prior to sensory experience.
What faculty enables us to gain a priori knowledge?
Reason.
What is innatism?
The view that certain knowledge or ideas are inborn rather than acquired through experience.
What does Plato’s Slave Boy Argument demonstrate?
That an uneducated boy can grasp geometric truths through questioning alone, implying innate knowledge.
How does Leibniz support innatism?
By arguing that necessarily true truths cannot be learned purely through experience and must come from innate ideas.
What is John Locke’s view on knowledge acquisition?
The mind starts as a blank slate (tabula rasa) and all ideas come from experience.
What are the two sources of ideas according to Locke?
Impressions (sensory data) and reflection (internal mental operations).
What is the Intuition and Deduction Thesis?
That a priori knowledge arises from immediate intuition and logical deduction from those intuitions.
What is Descartes’ famous phrase illustrating a priori intuition?
“Cogito, ergo sum” (“I think, therefore I am”).
What criticism do empiricists raise against Descartes’ cogito?
It presupposes the existence of a self, which is what needs to be proved.
What key distinction did David Hume make relevant to this topic?
Between relations of ideas (a priori, analytic) and matters of fact (a posteriori, synthetic).
Why do empiricists challenge a priori claims of existence (God, external world)?
Because such claims cannot be known independently of sensory experience or empirical evidence.