Research Group
in Analytic Philosophy

Abstract

I will present a new piece of evidence for the claim that there is no empirically defeasible a priori knowledge. I do so by providing support for the claim that in all instances of putatively a priori empirically defeasible knowledge of some proposition p, an introspective apprehension, either direct or mediated through memory, that p is the result of one’s own reasoning plays an evidential or justificatory role. This support will, in turn, be provided in the course of combining the old debate about a priori knowledge with the relatively recent debate about peer disagreement. That is, I will argue that the so-called Equal Weight View about peer disagreement is incompatible with the claim that there is empirically defeasible a priori knowledge.