Now, in The first place, if we have a proposition which contains the idea Of necessity in its very conception, it is a if, moreover, it is not Derived from any other proposition, unless from one equally involving The idea of necessity, it is absolutely priori.
Experience no doubt Teaches us that this or that object is constituted in such and such a Manner, but not that it could not possibly exist otherwise.
The Human Intellect, even in an Unphilosophical State, is in Possession of Certain Cognitions "a priori" The question now is as to a criterion, by which we may securely Distinguish a pure from an empirical cognition. For example, the proposition, "Every change has A cause," is a proposition a priori, but impure, because change is a Conception which can only be derived from experience II. Pure knowledge a priori is that with which no empirical Element is mixed up. Knowledge a priori is either Pure or impure. Opposed To this is empirical knowledge, or that which is possible only a Posteriori, that is, through experience. For, that bodies are heavy, and, consequently, that They fall when their supports are taken away, must have been known to Him previously, by means of experienceīy the term "knowledge a priori," therefore, we shall in the sequel Understand, not such as is independent of this or that kind of Experience, but such as is absolutely so of all experience. But still, a priori, he could not Know even this much. Thus If a man undermined his house, we say, "he might know a priori that It would have fallen " that is, he needed not to have waited for the Experience that it did actually fall. For, in Speaking of knowledge which has its sources in experience, we are won't To say, that this or that may be known a priori, because we do not Derive this knowledge immediately from experience, but from a general Rule, which, however, we have itself borrowed from experience. It is, therefore, a question which requires close Investigation, and not to be answered at first sight, whether there Exists a knowledge altogether independent of experience, and even of All sensuous impressions? Knowledge of this kind is called a priori In contradistinction to empirical knowledge, which has its sources a Posteriori, that is, in experience But the expression, "a priori," is not as yet definite enough adequately To indicate the whole meaning of the question above started. For, on the contrary, it is Quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which We receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of cognition Supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely the occasion) An addition which we cannot distinguish from the original element given By sense, till long practice has made us attentive to, and skilful In separating it. But, though all our knowledge begins with experience, it by no means Follows that all arises out of experience.
0 kommentar(er)
