« On Wendy Carlos
Addiction, the Sorites Paradox and Rationality »

Is everything a priori?

If the laws of nature are mathematical laws and regular in some way (as in either they don’t change or they change regularly), then does it follow that in such a universe everything that is ultimately knowable is knowable a priori?

If anything is a priori, then mathematics is. In a consistent mathematics, all well-formed formulas (and more?) are true statements (in that system at least). And if we have decided that nature is describable by math, then it would seem like ultimately all truths about nature are knowable a priori. That follows right?

This entry was posted on Sunday, April 11th, 2010 at 11:56 am and is filed under epistemology, fuckphilosophy, intoxicated, kinda philosophical. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “Is everything a priori?”

  1. Raleigh Says:
    May 4th, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    I don’t think so. Wouldn’t the physical constants (and the fact that natural facts could only be deduced from pure mathematics alone once you take them as given) be enough to make all physical, scientific knowledge a posteriori?

  2. admin Says:
    June 13th, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    Yes. You are right. I’m just trying to spread bad philosophy.

  3. Charles Chalmers Says:
    June 13th, 2010 at 7:22 pm

    Hi,

    Charles Chalmers here.

    Sincerely,

    Charles Chalmers,
    PhD, Philosophy

Leave a Reply