Is "thoughts exist" a synthetic a priori statement?

Question

I'm working off of Kant's conception of analytic/synthetic and a prior/a posteriori judgements.
The definition of "thoughts" does not subsume their existence. That is, it is logically possible to talk about thoughts in a world where humans are not around to think them. Therefore, "thoughts exist" is not true by the definition of what a "thought" is, and hence not analytic, but rather synthetic.
However, the fact that I am here right now having thoughts means that their existence is necessarily true. I do not need to go outside and look at the sky to confirm this, nor go to the library and read a book to confirm this. The fact that I had a thought necessitates their existence.

Nelson Alexander · Answer

It's analytical or, more properly, not a judgment at all.
In refuting the ontological proof of God, Kant famously says that "existence is not a predicate." One adds nothing to a subject by also stating that it "exists." Like cutting the Gordian knot, that was his way out of a lot of unproductive metaphysical tangles.
However, as I recall, Kant is a bit murky about the status of the self, and I'm not sure what he says about the Cartesian cogito, which might have some bearing on this "purified" version of it.

Rollo Burgess · Answer

I think that it is true that a 'thoughts exist' is synthetic, but not that it is a priori. Introspection (such as being aware that you are thinking) is a kind of experience.
You are right that, once had, the thought cannot be false - but that isn't the definition of a priori.

Mr. White · Answer

As in Kant existence is not a property of individuals, "thoughts exist" is not a well formed judgement. "I am thinking" or "I am having thoughts" results from an introspective experience and is thus a posteriori (and hence synthetic).

Answered by Mr. White on November 8, 2021

Is "thoughts exist" a synthetic a priori statement?

3 Answers

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question