A Study On Contingent A Priori Truths

To rigidly distinguish the thought world, the language word and the reality worldfaced by the subject of the cognition and action, this paper uses methodology of logicalactionism as an analytical tool. After a new investigation of the notions of "a priority","necessity","analysis" and the theory of "contingent a priori propositions", this paperconcludes that the contingent a priori propositions proposed by Kripke are not appropriate.Firstly, the notion of a prioricity is a conception of epistemology, it represents that theinitial way to get one thought is independent of any experience. The notion of necessity isa conception of metaphysics, it consists of relative necessity and absolute necessity. Thenotion of analysis is a conception of philosophy of language, it describes that in somedegree that the words in the analysic statements are synonymous and the negative of thosestatements are self-contradictory.Secondly, the subject of the cognition and action has thethought of intention and extension about objects, and when the thought represent inlanguage world, the names of the objects naturally have both meanings and references.Besides, in some degree, though descriptions are rigid designators which called by Kripke,rigid descriptions and proper names are not synonymous.Thus, this paper naturally reaches the following conclusion: the example of standardmeter bar is a posteriori proposition, it represents some relative necessity in the realityworld and it can not represent absolute necessity. The a priori examples of "Neptune" and"Cartesian cogito" only can represent relative necessity, too. The research of contingent apriori propositions shows both a priori truths and a posteriori truths can represent relativenecessity in the reality world, but can not represent absolute necessity.