A posteriori vs a priori arguments

Question 1

What is an a posteriori argument?

Answer 1

An argument based on sensory experience

Question 2

What is an a priori argument?

Answer 2

An argument before sensory experience based on reason alone

Question 3

Which scholars didn’t trust a posteriori arguments?

Answer 3

Descartes and Hume

Question 4

What are the strengths of a priori arguments?

Answer 4

+ Not based on senses that can deceive us
+ No need to collect sensory data
+ Mathematical formula and logical
+ If the the premises are true the conclusion is logically true

Question 5

What are the strengths of a priori arguments?

Answer 5

+ Not based on senses that can deceive us
+ No need to collect sensory data
+ Mathematical formula and logical
+ If the the premises are true the conclusion is logically
true
+ No empirical evidence against

Question 6

What are the weaknesses of a priori arguments?

Answer 6

• If we deny the premises the conclusion fails
• Can’t take into account empirical evidence for
• Is it possible to argue from the unknown to the known?
• Need senses to survive
• It may only be possible to know a priori definitions

Question 7

What are the strengths of a posteriori arguments?

Answer 7

+ Relies on sense experience which we all have access to

+ Can take into account empirical evidence for

Question 8

What are the weaknesses of a posteriori arguments?

Answer 8

• Our senses can deceive us
• Conclusion still only probable
• Must make a leap of faith to conclude God exists
• Must take into account empirical evidence against too
• Relies on known to explain unknown
• Can lead to different conclusions - wisdom’s parable
• Our senses our limited
• Can only know if something is true in the moment (Hume)