Why would someone want to make a distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge?
. Explain the difference between a priori and a posteriori knowledge
2. Give an example of someone (PLATO, DESCARTES, HUME, or STROUD) who uses this distinction to form an argument
a. Explain: 1) the aim of the argument 2) what the person is arguing against 3) how the distinction serves as a reason to support the claims made in the argument.
3. Use 1. and 2. to explain why they would want to make this distinctionGrading:
– Follows Topic instructions (5)
– Clearly and explicitly states: the distinction, the view presented by the example the aim of the argument in the example (5)
– Cleary and explicitly states how the argument (in the example) uses the distinction as a reason to support the claims it makes (5)The aim here is to:
1) Clearly identify what the person in your example is arguing
2) How they use the distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge to support (or provide reasons for) the claims presented in the argument
3) Use your discussion of this example to explain why someone would want to make this distinctionThe aim here is NOT:
1) To be critical of the example
2) Discuss potential objections
3) Mix your opinions with the ones expressed by your exampleThink of this as less of a paper and more of an exercise. The goal here is to be able to clearly state what someone is trying to accomplish with their argument and how they try to accomplish it.
Standard MLA formatting is fine. You are more than welcome to refer to yourself as ?I? in ALL of my papers