Does Apriority Involve Necessity?

Authors

  • Siraprapa Chavanayarn Siraprapa Chavanayarn is a professor of philosophy at Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. She can be reached at: faranento@hotmail.com

Abstract

Much has been discussed concerning apriority and its relation to the concept of necessity. Many philosophers have conventionally supposed that a proposition is known a priori only if it is necessarily true. According to Kant, for instance, the first philosopher who systematically discussed apriority, “necessity” is one of the criteria
of a priori knowledge. Kant (1958) maintains that all a priori knowledge is necessarily true. Thus, from this conventional thought, many philosophers claim that apriority involves necessity, and rejecting the concept of necessity unavoidably affects the status of apriority. That is, if all a priori propositions need to be necessarily true, and we can prove that there is no necessarily true proposition, we are forced to conclude that there are no a priori propositions. However, this paper aims to propose that apriority does not involve necessity since all a priori propositions need not be necessarily true. The paper has been separated into three parts. Firstly, I will discuss
the problem of necessity and its effect on the status of apriority. Secondly, I will argue that apriority does not involve necessity by considering the two following questions: (A) is there a necessary a posteriori proposition? And (B) is there a contingent a priori
proposition? Thirdly, I will scrutinize the possible objections and try to defend my argument which will involve some further considerations about a priori justification.

Downloads

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 1 (2010): January - June 2010

Section

Articles

License

Consent to Publish and Transfer of Copyright
By publishing in Prajñā Vihāra, the author agrees to transfer and assign to Assumption University of Thailand as the Publisher of the Journal, the copyright to the Article in any form, including any and all rights, interests and claims related to it.

The author does retain the following rights:

  1. The right to make further copies of the published article for their use in classroom teaching.
  2. The right to reuse all or part of the published article in a compilation of his or her own works or in textbooks of which they are the author or coauthor.
  3. The right to make copies of the published article for internal distribution within their academic institution.
  4. All proprietary rights other than copyright, such as patent rights.
The author must also guarantee that:
  1. The Article is his or her original work, and has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  2. It does not contain any matter that is obscene, libelous, or contrary to law.
  3. They have obtained the necessary license or written authority and paid any and all related fees for the use and reproduction of text, tables, illustrations and other copyrighted work from the owners of the intellectual property rights, and can furnish the Publisher copies of the license/written authority and proof of payment of related fees upon the signing of this Agreement.
  4. They have the consent of the Co-Authors of the article upon the signing of this Agreement.
  5. In the event that they intend to republish, reprint or translate all or part of the Article in other publications, they will secure the prior written permission from the journal Editor.

Prajñā Vihāra adopts the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND) license