It’s difficult to understand why anyone would ever get excited about Kant’s question “how are synthetic a priori propositions possible?” It’s an incredibly abstract question. Everything must be placed in context. That seems to lack any import beyond academic import. We have analytic a priori concepts. I think the concept “bachelor” and immediately think “unmarried male”. There’s nothing in an analytic a priori judgments or concepts that, to use Kant’s language, “amplifies” my concept of “bachelor”. “Unmarried male” is already contained in my concept of “bachelor”. It’s a matter of definitions. That’s why I can know it independent of experience. The NSF won’t fund a study for research into whether bachelors are unmarried males as there’s nothing to learn. We know it by definition.
With synthetic a posterior judgments, my knowledge is amplified. When I go to Morocco for the first time, my concept of Morocco is expanded. I synthesize
View original post 602 more words