Abstract
This paper is aimed at understanding one central aspect of Bolzano’s views on deductive knowledge: what it means for a proposition and for a term to be known a priori. I argue that, for Bolzano, a priori knowledge is knowledge by virtue of meaning and that Bolzano has substantial views about meaning and what it is to know the latter. In particular, Bolzano believes that meaning is determined by implicit definition, i.e. the fundamental propositions in a deductive system. I go into some detail in presenting and discussing Bolzano’s views on grounding, a priori knowledge and implicit definition. I explain why other aspects of Bolzano’s theory and, in particular, his peculiar understanding of analyticity and the related notion of Ableitbarkeit might, as it has invariably in the past, mislead one to believe that Bolzano lacks a significant account of a priori knowledge. Throughout the paper, I point out to the ways in which, in this respect, Bolzano’s antagonistic relationship to Kant directly shaped his own views.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aristotle. Posterior analytics. In: Barnes J. (eds). (1984). Complete works of Aristotle. Vol. I. Princeton, Princeton University Press
Bar-Hillel, Y. (1950). Bolzano’s definition of analytic propositions. Methodos, 32–55. Also in Theoria, 16, 91–117. Reprinted in Aspects of language. Essays and lectures on philosophy of language, linguistic philosophy and methodology of linguistics, pp. 3–28, 1970. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press—The Hebrew University.
Bolzano, B. (1810). Beyträge zu einer begründeteren Darstellung der Mathematik. Reprinted by C. Widtmann, (Ed.). (1974). Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Bolzano, B. (1812). Etwas aus der Logik. In L. Winter et al. (Eds.). (1969). Bernard Bolzano Gesamtausgabe (Vol. 2 B 5, pp. 140ff.). Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
Bolzano, B. (1837). Wissenschaftslehre. In L. Winter et al. (Eds.). (1969). Bernard Bolzano Gesamtausgabe (Reihe 1. Vol. 11–14). Stuttgart-Bad Canstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
Bolzano, B. (1851). Paradoxien des Unendlichen. Reprinted by Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft (1964). In Höfler & Hahn (Eds.). (1920). Dr Bernard Bolzano’s Paradoxien des Unendlichen herausgegeben aus dem schriftlichem Nachlasse des Verfassers von Dr Fr. Příhonský. Leipzig: Meiner.
Bolzano B. and Příhonský F. (1850). Neuer Anti-Kant: Oder Prüfung der Kritik der reinen Vernunft nach den in Bolzanos Wissenschaftslehre niedergelegten Begriffen. Bautzen, Hiecke
Carson E. (2005). Locke and Kant on mathematical knowledge. In: Carson, E. and Huber, R. (eds) Intuition and the axiomatic method, pp 3–20. Springer, Dordrecht
de Jong W.R. (2001). Bernard Bolzano. Analyticity and the Aristotelian model of science. Kant-Studien 92: 328–349
de Jong, W. R. (2008). The analytic-synthetic distinction and the Classical Model of Science: Kant, Bolzano, Frege. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-008-9420-9.
de Jong, W. R., & Betti, A. (2008). The Classical Model of Science: A millennia-old model of scientific rationality. Synthese. doi:10.1007/s11229-008-9417-4.
Dubucs J. and Lapointe S. (2006). On Bolzano’s alleged explicativism. Synthese 150: 229–246
Friedman M. (1992). Kant and the exact sciences. Harvard University Press, Cambridge/London
Hintikka J. (1966). Kant vindicated. In: Weingartner, P. (eds) Deskription, Existenz und Analytizität, pp. München, Pustet
Künne W. (2006). Analyticity and logical truth: From Bolzano to Quine. In: Textor, M. (eds) The Austrian contribution to analytic philosophy, pp 184–249. Routledge, London
Lapointe S. (2000). Analyticité, universalité et quantification chez Bolzano. Les Études Philosophiques 4: 455–470
Lapointe, S. (2002). Bolzano et la réception de Kant en Autriche. In C. Piché (Ed.), Années 1781–1801. Kant. Critique de la raison pure. Vingt ans de réception (pp. 263–271). Paris: Vrin.
Lapointe, S. (2006). Introduction. In S. Lapointe (Ed. & Trans.), Bolzano contre Kant, le nouvel anti-Kant. Paris: Vrin.
Lapointe S. (2007). Bolzano’s semantics and his critique of the decompositional conception of analysis. In: Beaney, M. (eds) The analytic turn, pp 219–234. Routledge, London
Lapointe S. (2008). Qu’est-ce que l’analyse?. Vrin, Paris
Laz J. (1993). Bolzano critique de Kant. Vrin, Paris
Majer U. (2005). The relation of logic and intuition in Kant’s philosophy of science, particularly geometry. In: Carson, E. and Huber, R. (eds) Intuition and the axiomatic method, pp 47–66. Springer, Dordrecht
Morscher E. (1997). Bolzano’s method of variation: Three puzzles. Grazer Philosophische Studien 53: 139–165
Morscher E. (2003a). Neuer Anti-Kant. Sankt-Augustin, Academia
Morscher E. (2003b). La définition bolzanienne de l’analyticité logique. Philosophiques 30: 149–170
Neeman U. (1970). Analytic and synthetic propositions in Kant and Bolzano. Ratio 12: 1–25
Palagyi M. (1902). Kant und Bolzano. Eine kritische Parallele. Halle, Niemayer
Proust J. (1981). Bolzano’s analytic revisited. The Monist 64: 214–230
Rusnock P. (2000). Bolzano’s philosophy and the emergence of modern mathematics. Rodopi, Amsterdam
Sebestik J. (1992). Logique et mathématique chez Bernard Bolzano. Vrin, Paris
Siebel, M. (1997). Bolzanos ableitbarkeit und Tarskis logische folgerung. In Proceedings of the Second Conference Perspectives in Analytical Philosophy (pp. 148–156). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Siebel M. (2002). Bolzano’s concept of consequence. The Monist 85: 580–599
Tatzel A. (2002). Bolzano’s theory of ground and consequence. Notre-Dame Journal of Symbolic Logic 43: 1–25
Textor M. (2000). Bolzano et Husserl sur l’analyticité. Les Études Philosophiques 4: 435–454
Textor M. (2001). Logically analytic propositions a posteriori. History of Philosophy Quarterly 18: 91–113
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lapointe, S. Bolzano a priori knowledge, and the Classical Model of Science. Synthese 174, 263–281 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9421-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9421-8