Cassirer and Reichenbach on the conventionality of geometry

Much of the scholarship on the relativization of the a priori has taken its starting point from the way in which Reichenbach, in The Theory of Relativity and A Priori Knowledge (1920), accounts for the possibility of varying the coordinating principles linking abstract mathematical structures to empirical reality. Such are the principles that Reichenbach called a priori in the sense of constitutive of the objects of experience but no longer valid for all time as Kant thought. However, this poses the problem of distinguishing the relativization of the Kantian a priori from conventionalism. This paper aims to reconsider this issue in the example of Cassirer's and Reichenbach's discussions of the status of geometry in general relativity. It will be argued that both Cassirer and Reichenbach, when his work is read against the neo-Kantian background of the debate, offer a genuine option, according to which the relativization of the Kantian a priori depends on the interrelation of different levels of constitutivity.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2026.102231
Primary Topic
Philosophy, Science, and History
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cassirer and Reichenbach on the conventionality of geometry

Francesca Biagioli
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A
Philosophy, Science, and History
article

Cassirer and Reichenbach on the conventionality of geometry

Francesca Biagioli
article en

Abstract

Much of the scholarship on the relativization of the a priori has taken its starting point from the way in which Reichenbach, in The Theory of Relativity and A Priori Knowledge (1920), accounts for the possibility of varying the coordinating principles linking abstract mathematical structures to empirical reality. Such are the principles that Reichenbach called a priori in the sense of constitutive of the objects of experience but no longer valid for all time as Kant thought. However, this poses the problem of distinguishing the relativization of the Kantian a priori from conventionalism. This paper aims to reconsider this issue in the example of Cassirer's and Reichenbach's discussions of the status of geometry in general relativity. It will be argued that both Cassirer and Reichenbach, when his work is read against the neo-Kantian background of the debate, offer a genuine option, according to which the relativization of the Kantian a priori depends on the interrelation of different levels of constitutivity.

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part AVol. 120
Ministero dell'Istruzione e del Merito
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Philosophy, Science, and History
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.