分析-綜合區別 (Chinese Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "分析-綜合區別" in Chinese language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank Chinese rank
1st place
1st place
179th place
275th place
low place
880th place

hkbu.edu.hk

  • In "Knowledge and Experience – An Examination of the Four Reflective 'Perspectives' in Kant's Critical Philosophy", Kant-Studien 78:2 (1987), pp.170-200, Stephen Palmquist shows how Kant's own discussion of the role of hypotheses (and the "as if" approach) in philosophy can be understood only as an example of analytic aposteriority. See also the revised version of this article, reprinted as Chapter IV of Stephen Palmquist, Kant's System of Perspectives页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆): An architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy (Lanham: University Press of America, 1993). In "A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (II) Naming, Necessity and the Analytic A Posteriori", The Review of Metaphysics 41:2 (December 1987), pp.255-282, Palmquist argues that Saul Kripke uses Kant's terms incorrectly when he analyzes naming as contingent a priori; when Kripke's use of the key terms is translated to make it consistent with Kant's usage, Kripke's position can be understood as defending the analytic a posteriority of naming.

stanford.edu

plato.stanford.edu

web.archive.org

  • Rey, Georges. The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2010 Edition). [February 12, 2012]. (原始内容存档于2020-11-30). 
  • In "Knowledge and Experience – An Examination of the Four Reflective 'Perspectives' in Kant's Critical Philosophy", Kant-Studien 78:2 (1987), pp.170-200, Stephen Palmquist shows how Kant's own discussion of the role of hypotheses (and the "as if" approach) in philosophy can be understood only as an example of analytic aposteriority. See also the revised version of this article, reprinted as Chapter IV of Stephen Palmquist, Kant's System of Perspectives页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆): An architectonic interpretation of the Critical philosophy (Lanham: University Press of America, 1993). In "A Priori Knowledge in Perspective: (II) Naming, Necessity and the Analytic A Posteriori", The Review of Metaphysics 41:2 (December 1987), pp.255-282, Palmquist argues that Saul Kripke uses Kant's terms incorrectly when he analyzes naming as contingent a priori; when Kripke's use of the key terms is translated to make it consistent with Kant's usage, Kripke's position can be understood as defending the analytic a posteriority of naming.