Advertisement

A Priori Knowledge in Bolzano, Conceptual Truths, and Judgements

  • Stefan Roski
Chapter
Part of the Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science book series (LEUS, volume 31)

Abstract

According to Kant, a true judgement can be called a priori in case it can take place absolutely (schlechterdings) independent of experience. Propositions that are knowable in this way are called a priori propositions by him (Kant 1787 B, 3–4). As is well known, the class of those a priori propositions that are synthetic was particularly important for Kant. In contrast to analytic propositions, they are supposed to contain nontrivial information about the world and yet be irrefutable by experience. Not many of his critics were satisfied with Kant’s way of drawing this distinction. Peter Strawson, for example, writes in his commentary on the Critique of Pure Reason:

Keywords

Objective Representation True Proposition Subjective Representation Conceptual Truth True Judgement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This chapter has profited considerably from discussions with Arianna Betti and Iris Loeb. I am also indebted to comments and suggestions from Johan Blok, Anthony Booth, Lieven Decock, Wim de Jong, Sebastian Lutz, Rik Peels, and Herman Philipse and an anonymous referee. Work on this chapter was made possible by ERC Starting Grant TRANH 203194.

Bibliography

  1. Ayer, A.J. 1946. Language truth and logic, 2nd ed. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  2. Berg, J. 1962. Bolzano’s logic. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
  3. Berg, J. 1987. Einleitung des Herausgebers. In Bernard Bolzano Gesamtausgabe, Reihe 1, Bd. 12,1, ed. J. Berg a.o., 5–62. Stuttgart Bad-Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  4. Berg, J. 2003. Bolzano’s heuristics. In Bernard Bolzanos Leistungen in Logik, Mathematik und Physik, ed. E. Morscher, 35–56. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Betti, A. 2010. Explanation in metaphysics and Bolzano’s theory of ground and consequence. Logique et Analyse 211(53): 281–316.Google Scholar
  6. Betti, A. 2012. Bolzano’s universe: Truth, logic and metaphysics. In Categories of being: Essays on metaphysics and logic, ed. L. Haaparanta and H.J. Koskinen, 167–190. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bolzano, B. 1804. Betrachtungen über einige Gegenstände der Elementargeometrie. Prag: Karl Barth.Google Scholar
  8. Bolzano, B. 1969ff./1837 [WL]. Wissenschaftslehre. In Bernard Bolzano Gesamtausgabe, Reihe 1, Bd. 11–14, ed. J. Berg a.o. Stuttgart Bad-Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  9. Bolzano, B. 1975/1833–41. Translated in on the mathematical method and correspondence with Exner, ed. P. Rusnock and R. George. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  10. Bolzano, B. 1978/1848. Selbstkritik der Wissenschaftslehre. In Bernard Bolzano Gesamtausgabe, Reihe 2A, Bd. 12/2, ed. J. Berg a.o., 187–189. Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  11. Bolzano, B. 2004/1810. Contributions to a better-grounded presentation of mathematics. In The mathematical works of Bernard Bolzano, ed. S. Russ, 83–138. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bolzano, B., and F. Exner. 2004. Selections from the Bolzano Exner correspondence. In On the mathematical method and correspondence with Exner, ed. P. Rusnock and R. George. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  13. Buhl, G. 1961. Ableitbarkeit und Abfolge in der Wissenschaftstheorie Bolzanos. Köln: Kölner Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  14. Carnap, R. 1956. Meaning and necessity. A study in semantics and modal logic, 2nd ed. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Centrone, S. 2011. Begründungen bei Bolzano und beim frühen Husserl. Zeitschrift für Philoso-phische Forschung 65(1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Jong, W.R. 2001. Bernard Bolzano, analyticity and the Aristotelian model of science. Kant Studien 92(3): 328–349.Google Scholar
  17. Frege, G. 1987/1884. Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  18. George, R. 1999. Anschauungen bei Kant und Bolzano. In Bernard Bolzanos geistiges Erbe für das 21. Jahrhundert, ed. E. Morscher, 129–144. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Kant, I. 1787. Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Riga: Hartknoch.Google Scholar
  20. Kant, I. 2001/1783. Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschaft wird auftreten können. Hamburg: Meiner.Google Scholar
  21. Konzelmann Ziv, A. 2008. Naturalized rationality – A glance at Bolzano’s philosophy of mind. Baltic International Yearbook for Cognition, Logic and Communication, ‘200 Years of Analytical Philosophy’ 4: 1–12.Google Scholar
  22. Künne, W. 2008. Analyticity and logical truth: From Bolzano to Quine. In Versuche über Bolzano, ed. W. Künne, 233–303. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. Lapointe, S. 2010. Bolzano, a priori knowledge and the classical model of science. Synthese 174: 263–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Morscher, E. 2008. Bolzano’s life and work. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
  25. Proust, J. 1989. Questions of form: Logic and the analytic proposition from Kant to Carnap. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Quine, W.V.O. 1977a. Carnap on logical truth. In Ways of Paradox and other essays. Revised and enlarged edition, ed. W.V.O. Quine, 107–132. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Quine, W.V.O. 1977b. Truth by convention. In Ways of Paradox and other essays. Revised and enlarged edition, ed. W.V.O. Quine. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Rusnock, P. 2000. Bolzano’s philosophy and the emergence of modern mathematics. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  29. Sartwell, C. 1991. Knowledge is merely true belief. American Philosophical Quarterly 28: 157–165.Google Scholar
  30. Sebestik, J. 2011. Bolzano’s logic. In The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E. Zalta, winter 2011 edition.Google Scholar
  31. Siebel, M. 1999. Bolzanos Erkenntnistheorie. In Bernard Bolzanos geistiges Erbe für das 21. Jahrhundert, ed. E. Morscher, 59–95. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Strawson, P.F. 1966. The bounds of sense. An essay on Kant’s critique of pure reason. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Tatzel, A. 2002. Bolzano’s theory of ground and consequence. Notre Dame Journal of Symbolic Logic 43: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Textor, M. 1996. Bolzanos propositionalismus. Berlin/New York: Walter De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Textor, M. 2001. Logically analytic propositions a posteriori. History of Philosophy Quarterly 19(1): 91–113.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PhilosophyVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations