Table Of ContentKompa,Nimtz,Suhm(eds.)·TheAPriorianditsRoleinPhilosophy
Nikola Kompa, Christian Nimtz
and Christian Suhm (eds.)
The A Priori and its
Role in Philosophy
mentis
PADERBORN
BibliografischeInformationderDeutschenNationalbibliothek
DieDeutscheNationalbibliothekverzeichnetdiesePublikation
inderDeutschenNationalbibliografie;detaillierte
bibliografischeDatensindimInternetüber
http://dnb.d-nb.deabrufbar.
Gedrucktaufumweltfreundlichem,chlorfreigebleichtem
undalterungsbeständigemPapier ∞ ISO9706
©2009mentisVerlagGmbH
Schulze-Delitzsch-Straße19,D-33100Paderborn
www.mentis.de
AlleRechtevorbehalten.DiesesWerksowieeinzelneTeiledesselbensindurheberrechtlichgeschützt.
JedeVerwertunginanderenalsdengesetzlichzulässigenFällenistohnevorherigeZustimmungdes
Verlagesnichtzulässig.
PrintedinGermany
Einbandgestaltung:AnnaBraungart,Tübingen
Satz:Rhema–TimDoherty,Münster[ChH](www.rhema-verlag.de)
Druck:AZDruckundDatentechnikGmbH,Kempten
ISBN:978-3-89785-662-2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The contributions to his volume have grown out of the invited contributions
to three international conferences on the a priori – A Priori Justification (Oelde,
Westphalia, February 2006), Implicit Definitions and A Priori Knowledge (Berlin,
September2006),andTheAPrioriandItsRoleinPhilosophy(Oelde,Westphalia,
June 2007). All three conferences have been organised by the Research Network
onAPrioriJustificationfundedbytheGermanNationalResearchCouncil(DFG)
(DFG number KO 1971/4-1). We are extremely grateful for the funding pro-
videdbytheDFG,aswellasforthehelpfulsupportprovidedbythisinstitution
and its officials. We would also like to thank the German Society for Analytic
Philosophy(GAP)forincludingourBerlinworkshopintheirsixthinternational
conference. At the University of Münster, we would like to thank Prof. Scholz
and Prof. Rheinwald for their valuable support and priceless encouragement,
Sebastian Schmoranzer and Andreas Berg-Hildebrand for all the work they put
intotheinitialapplication,andMr.GütschowandMr.Rensmannforthesmooth
managementofourfinances.AtBielefeldUniversity,wewouldliketothankLars
Dänzerforhisinvaluablehelpineditingthisvolume.Ourgreatestdebt,however,
istothosewhomadethethreeconferencesthepleasantandinspiringeventsthey
turnedouttobe–Mrs.Teeke,Mr.KortmannandMr.StrangfeldatOelde,who
impresseduswiththeirkindhospitality,JulianThomasatBerlin,andlastbutnot
leastallthemembersofthenetworkandallparticipantsofourthreeconferences.
Weforourpartenjoyeditallalot.
CONTENTS
ChristianNimtz,NikolaKompaandChristianSuhm
Introduction:TheAPriorianditsRoleinPhilosophy 9
WolfgangSpohn
APrioriReasons:TwoDifficultNotionsand
anEvenMoreDifficultConnection 25
CatrinMisselhorn
TwoTypesofAPrioriWarrantinContentPreservation 39
SörenHäggqvist
ModalKnowledgeandtheForm
ofThoughtExperiments 53
IsidoraStojanovic
TheViciousTriangleofAPrioriTruth,
ContingentTruth,andLogicalTruth 69
PaulHorwich
UngroundedReason 83
AlexBurri
APrioriJustification 103
Hans-JohannGlock
Apriority,AnalyticityandLanguage 119
ChristianNimtz
ConceptualTruthDefended 137
NikolaKompa
AnalyticTheoriesoftheAPriori 157
8 Contents
OliverScholz
TheMethodologyofPresumptionRules–
BetweentheAPrioriandtheAPosteriori 173
GeorgesRey
Concepts,DefaultsandInternalAsymmetricDependencies:
DistillationsofFodorandHorwich 185
StathisPsillosandDemetraChristopoulou
TheAPriori:BetweenConventionsandImplicitDefinitions 205
ChristianSuhm
RemodelingInferencetotheBestExplanation–Towardsan
APrioriJustificationofInduction 221
NikoStrobach
1+1=2–ButWhy? 239
GerhardErnst
IsMoralKnowledgeAPrioriKnowledge? 247
Contributors 261
Index 263
ChristianNimtz/NikolaKompa/ChristianSuhm
INTRODUCTION: THE A PRIORI AND
ITS ROLE IN PHILOSOPHY
Why the A Priori is of Concern to Philosophy
1.
On the face of it, the a priori is of concern to philosophers because it marks an
important subject of philosophical inquiry. Since epistemologists are concerned
withknowledgeinitsvarieties,theyareboundtodealwithaprioriknowledge,
justastheyareboundtobeconcernedwithperceptualknowledgeandself-knowl-
edge.Thereshould,moreover,benodoubtthatinquiringintowhether›apriori‹
primarily characterises a variety of knowledge or a sort of propositions, what
a priori propositions are, what potential sources of non-experiential justification
theremightbe,andhowaprioriknowledgeisrelatedtoempiricalknowledgeare
importantepistemologicaltasksintheirownright.Wewillsubsumeallthisunder
thelabeloftheanalyticproject.Afterall,theactualdebateverymuchfocuseson
providingananalysisofwhataprioriknowledgeamountsto.
Thereis,however,asecondreasonwhytheaprioriisofconcerntophiloso-
phers.Philosophyitselfisregularlyclassedasanaprioridiscipline,notablysoby
Kant(KrVB18),theLogicalEmpiricists(seeAyer1946,chs.2–3)andcontempo-
raryrationalists(seeBealer1998,2002).Todosoisnottoclaimthatphilosophers
exclusivelyrelyon,oraimat,aprioriknowledge.Todosoistoholdthatphiloso-
phers may embark on a priori inquiries aimed at a priori insights. This idea fits
wellwithwhattheyappeartobedoing.Manyphilosophersneitherpursueexten-
siveempiricalresearch,norrelymuchonthelatestinsightstheempiricalsciences
provide. In dealing with philosophical questions concerning e.g. consciousness,
meaning, values, properties, morally good actions, explanation, free will, and
the like, they stick to their proverbial armchairs. If philosophy was an a priori
discipline,thiscouldeasily beexplained.Sois philosophyanaprioridiscipline?
Moregenerally,howdoestheaprioriaffectphilosophicalmethods,aims,topics
and research programmes within the different philosophical disciplines? These
questions mark hotly contested issues within philosophy, and we will subsume
therespectivedebatesundertheheadingofthereflectionproject.
Recentcollectionsontheapriorihavemostlybeenconcernedwiththeanalytic
project(seeMoser1989,Casullo1999,Boghossian/Peacocke2000).Bycontrast,
10 ChristianNimtz/NikolaKompa/ChristianSuhm
the contributions to this book devote a substantial part of their efforts to the
reflection project. It goes withoutsaying that these projects are not independent
ofoneanother.Rightfullyclassingphilosophicalinquiryasaprioripresupposesa
clear grasp of what philosophical inquiry amounts to as well as a robust under-
standing of the a priori. However, we do not need to wait for a refined analysis
of the a priori to emerge before we can take up the reflection project; a robust
working conceptionof a priori knowledge will do. Embarking on the reflection
projectismoreoverlikelytoadvancetheanalyticprojectaswell.Worryingabout
whetherornottoclassphilosophicalinquiries,approaches,methods,andinsights
as a priori should improve our grasp on the a priori. So pursuing the reflection
projectshouldbeofvaluetotheanalyticproject.
The Analytic Project, or Defining
2.
A Priori Knowledge
Theepithet›apriori‹iscommonlyemployedtocharacterizeavarietyofpropo-
sitional knowledge, thereby marking it off from knowledge that is empirical or
aposteriori.Butwhatis aprioriknowledge?Moretothepoint:
• WhatdoesittakeforathinkerS toaprioriknowthatp?
There are two routes to answering this question. One could either try to trace
back the a priori status of someone’s knowledge that p to some characteristic
featureofitspropositionalcontentp.Thisapproachexplainsaprioriknowledge
intermsofaprioripropositions.Oronecouldtrytotracebacktheaprioristatus
of someone’s knowledge that p to some characteristic feature of the thinker’s
epistemicrelationtothepropositionalcontentp.Thisapproachexplainsapriori
propositions interms ofapriori knowledge. It likewise explainstheapriorityof
concepts, epistemic procedures, or whole sciences by the relations they bear to
aprioriknowledge.
WefindthefirstapproachatworkinHume’sdistinctionbetween›relationsof
ideas‹ and ›matters offact‹ (EHU §4), andit figures prominently inthe Logical
Empiricists’dealingswiththeaprioriintermsofanalyticpropositions(seeAyer
1946,ch.4).Itmayalsoexplainwhymanycontemporaryaccountsoftheapriori
focus on a priori propositions (see e.g. Kripke 1980, 34, Blackburn 1994, 21,
Boghossian/Peacocke 2000b,1, Field 2000). However, finding a property other
thanthe property of being a potentialcontent of a priori knowledge that marks
offaprioripropositionshasprovenchallenging.Thetraditionalideathatapriori
propositions are ›true solely in virtue of meaning‹ could foot the bill, but there
arereasonstodoubtthatsuchametaphysicalaccountofanalyticityisviable(see
Boghossian 1997, Nimtz, this volume). Moreover, there is reason to think that
