background preloader

A priori and a posteriori

A priori and a posteriori
The terms a priori ("from the earlier") and a posteriori ("from the later") are used in philosophy (epistemology) to distinguish two types of knowledge, justification, or argument: A priori knowledge or justification is independent of experience (for example "All bachelors are unmarried"). Galen Strawson has stated that an a priori argument is one in which "you can see that it is true just lying on your couch. You don't have to get up off your couch and go outside and examine the way things are in the physical world. You don't have to do any science. There are many points of view on these two types of knowledge, and their relationship is one of the oldest problems in modern philosophy. The terms a priori and a posteriori are primarily used as adjectives to modify the noun "knowledge" (for example, "a priori knowledge"). Examples[edit] The intuitive distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge (or justification) is best seen in examples. A priori A posteriori History[edit] [edit]

Related:  Latin Philosophical PhrasesDiscourse Project

Ab ovo In literature[edit] The English literary use of the phrase comes from Horace's Ars Poetica, where he describes his ideal epic poet as one who "does not begin the Trojan War from the double egg" (nec gemino bellum Troianum orditur ab ouo), the absolute beginning of events, the earliest possible chronological point, but snatches the listener into the middle of things (in medias res). This advice is famously rejected in Laurence Sterne's novel The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman. This use is distinct from the longer phrase ab ovo usque ad mala (lit.

Episteme Episteme, as distinguished from techne, is etymologically derived from the Ancient Greek word ἐπιστήμη for knowledge or science, which comes from the verb ἐπίσταμαι, "to know". In Plato's terminology episteme means knowledge, as in "justified true belief", in contrast to doxa, common belief or opinion. The word epistemology, meaning the study of knowledge, is derived from episteme. Electromagnetic theories of consciousness Several theorists have proposed that consciousness can be understood as an electromagnetic phenomenon. Their theories differ in how they relate consciousness to electromagnetism. For example, electromagnetic field theories (or "EM field theories") of consciousness propose that consciousness results when a brain produces an electromagnetic field with features that meet certain criteria; Susan Pockett[1] and Johnjoe McFadden[2][3][4] have proposed EM field theories; William Uttal[5] has criticized McFadden's and other field theories. Some electromagnetic theories are also quantum mind theories of consciousness; examples include quantum brain dynamics (QBD) approaches of Mari Jibu and Kunio Yasue[6] and of Giuseppe Vitiello.[7] In general, however, quantum mind theories other than these QBD approaches do not treat consciousness as an electromagnetic phenomenon. Also related are E. Cemi theory[edit]

Utility Economic definitions[edit] In economics, utility is a representation of preferences over some set of goods and services. Preferences have a (continuous) utility representation so long as they are transitive, complete, and continuous. Utility is usually applied by economists in such constructs as the indifference curve, which plot the combination of commodities that an individual or a society would accept to maintain a given level of satisfaction. Individual utility and social utility can be construed as the value of a utility function and a social welfare function respectively. When coupled with production or commodity constraints, under some assumptions, these functions can be used to analyze Pareto efficiency, such as illustrated by Edgeworth boxes in contract curves.

Ad nauseam Ad nauseam is a Latin term for a discussion that has continued so long that it has continued "to [the point of] nausea".[1][2] For example, the sentence "This topic has been discussed ad nauseam" signifies that the topic in question has been discussed extensively, and that those involved in the discussion have grown tired of it. Etymology[edit] This term is defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as: Argumentum ad nauseam or argument from repetition or argumentum ad infinitum is an argument made repeatedly (possibly by different people) until nobody cares to discuss it any more. This may sometimes, but not always, be a form of proof by assertion.

Discourse community A discourse community is a group of people who share a set of discourses, understood as basic values and assumptions, and ways of communicating about those goals. Linguist John Swales defined discourse communities as "groups that have goals or purposes, and use communication to achieve these goals."[1] Since the discourse community itself is intangible, it is easier to imagine discourse communities in terms of the fora in which they operate. Quantum mind The quantum mind or quantum consciousness hypothesis proposes that classical mechanics cannot explain consciousness, while quantum mechanical phenomena, such as quantum entanglement and superposition, may play an important part in the brain's function, and could form the basis of an explanation of consciousness. It is not one theory, but a collection of distinct ideas described below. A few theoretical physicists have argued that classical physics is intrinsically incapable of explaining the holistic aspects of consciousness, whereas quantum mechanics can. The idea that quantum theory has something to do with the workings of the mind go back to Eugene Wigner, who assumed that the wave function collapses due to its interaction with consciousness. The philosopher David Chalmers has argued against quantum consciousness.

Decision theory Normative and descriptive decision theory[edit] Since people usually do not behave in ways consistent with axiomatic rules, often their own, leading to violations of optimality, there is a related area of study, called a positive or descriptive discipline, attempting to describe what people will actually do. Since the normative, optimal decision often creates hypotheses for testing against actual behaviour, the two fields are closely linked. Furthermore it is possible to relax the assumptions of perfect information, rationality and so forth in various ways, and produce a series of different prescriptions or predictions about behaviour, allowing for further tests of the kind of decision-making that occurs in practice. In recent decades, there has been increasing interest in what is sometimes called 'behavioral decision theory' and this has contributed to a re-evaluation of what rational decision-making requires.[1] What kinds of decisions need a theory?

Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas Amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas is a Latin phrase, translating to "Plato is my friend, but truth is a better friend (literally: Plato is friend, but truth is more friend (to me than he is))." The maxim is often attributed to Aristotle, as a paraphrase of the Nicomachean Ethics 1096a15: “Where both are friends, it is right to prefer truth”. The closest Latin prototype is found in Roger Bacon, Opus Majus, Pars I, cap. v.[1] Nam Plato dicit: "Amicus est Socrates, magister meus, sed magis est amica veritas." Et Aristotelis dicit se magis velle consentire veritati, quam amicitiae Platonis, doctoris nostri.

Discipline and Punish Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (French: Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la Prison) is a 1975 book by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. An analysis of the social and theoretical mechanisms behind the massive changes that occurred in Western penal systems during the modern age, it focuses on historical documents from France. Foucault argues against the idea that the prison became the consistent form of punishment due mainly to the humanitarian concerns of reformists. He traces the cultural shifts that led to the prison's dominance, focusing on the body and questions of power. Prison is a form used by the "disciplines", a new technological power, which can also be found, according to Foucault, in places such as schools, hospitals, and military barracks.

Quantum entanglement Quantum entanglement is a physical phenomenon that occurs when pairs or groups of particles are generated or interact in ways such that the quantum state of each particle cannot be described independently – instead, a quantum state may be given for the system as a whole. Such phenomena were the subject of a 1935 paper by Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen,[1] describing what came to be known as the EPR paradox, and several papers by Erwin Schrödinger shortly thereafter.[2][3] Einstein and others considered such behavior to be impossible, as it violated the local realist view of causality (Einstein referred to it as "spooky action at a distance"),[4] and argued that the accepted formulation of quantum mechanics must therefore be incomplete. History[edit]

Risk Risk is the potential of losing something of value, weighed against the potential to gain something of value. Values (such as physical health, social status, emotional well being or financial wealth) can be gained or lost when taking risk resulting from a given action, activity and/or inaction, foreseen or unforeseen. Risk can also be defined as the intentional interaction with uncertainty. Risk perception is the subjective judgment people make about the severity of a risk, and may vary person to person. Any human endeavor carries some risk, but some are much riskier than others.[1] Definitions[edit]