a priori

(redirected from Apriorism)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Financial, Encyclopedia.

a priori

Deduced from first principles; in the first instance; without prior knowledge
Segen's Medical Dictionary. © 2012 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
It traffics in apriorism and tends to dismiss the usual notions of truth.
(10.) See Murray Rothbard, "In Defense of Extreme Apriorism," SEJ 23 (1957): 3.
To insist that such restricted representations are required by human thought would be to commit apriorism no less egregiously than did Kant, as we can now say with hindsight,(10) when he argued that space and time 'must' be Euclidean lest we not be able to form a coherent conception of a located material object.
Godel places "apriorism" on the right side of this schema, and empiricism on the left.
One cannot raise any questions about apriorism, the crassness of all he takes for granted, the seemingly overlooked necessities for reflexivity, and a few other expectations for proper knowledge as cherished by social science.
Two major theories, apriorism and conventionalism, will be covered first, and then we shall proceed to a more general view of the subjectivist tradition.
In the same lecture notes, Rahner points out that an "apriorism of finitude" (Apriorismus der Endlichkeit) sustains Heidegger's thinking.
If only because I'm determined to rescue him from obscurity, I suggest as an alternative to "ideology" a catchword used by the late poet-historian Peter Viereck: "apriorism." In Conservative Thinkers: From John Adams to Winston Churchill, Viereck described early conservatives' use of the term a priori "for ideas deduced entirely from 'prior' ideas, as opposed to ideas rooted in historical experience....
Stiegler's slightly alleviated version of technological determinism (alleviated because he thinks of technology in deconstructive terms as pharmakon, as poison and remedy at once, but only because there is no escape from technology), might very well be an echo, on the 'ontic' level, of his technological apriorism on the ontological level, i.e.
One can easily first see the tension between Public Choice and natural rights within the motivating question asked by Tullock (1966, p.4), "[w]hat is the mechanism which leads the scientist 'by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention?"--in contrast to deductive apriorism. Block (2005) and Block and DiLorenzo (2000, 2001) write against one central feature of Public Choice, treating politics as exchange.
In Defense of "Extreme Apriorism", Southern Economic Journal, January 1957, pp.
Apriorism and privileged intuition in mainstream economics