Knowledge is said to be a priori when it can be acquired without
requiring any fact of experience as a premiss; in the contrary case,
it is said to be empirical. A few words are necessary to make the
distinction clear. There is a process by which we acquire knowledge of
dated events at times closely contiguous to them; this is the process
called "perception" or "introspection"[41] according to the character
of the events concerned. There is no doubt need of much discussion
as to the nature of this process, and of still more as to the nature
of the knowledge to be derived from it; but there can be no doubt of
the broad fact that we do acquire knowledge in this way. We wake up
and find that it is daylight, or that it is still night; we hear a
clock strike; we see a shooting star; we read the newspaper; and so
on. In all these cases we acquire knowledge of events, and the time
at which we acquire the knowledge is the same, or nearly the same,
as that at which the events take place. I shall call this process
"perception,"[Pg 174] and shall, for convenience, include introspection—if
this is really different from what is commonly called "perception." A
fact of "experience" is one which we could not have known without the
help of perception. But this is not quite clear until we have defined
what we mean by "could not"; for clearly we may learn from experience
that 2 + 2 = 4, though we afterwards realize that the experience was
not logically indispensable. In such cases, we see afterwards that the
experience did not prove the proposition, but merely suggested it, and
led to our finding the real proof. But, in view of the fact that the
distinction between empirical and a priori is epistemological,
not logical, it is obviously possible for a proposition to change from
the one class to the other, since the classification involves reference
to the organization of a particular person's knowledge at a particular
time. So regarded, the distinction might seem unimportant; but it
suggests some less subjective distinctions, which are what we really
wish to consider.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account