Q&A: The Evidence for the Synthetic
The Evidence for the Synthetic
Question
I read an argument of yours that there is empirical evidence that synthetic thinking is correct, from the fact that in science synthetic claims were made about the world and were proven correct over time. But bringing such a proof and saying that therefore synthetic thinking is correct in other places as well is not valid unless one adopts the principles of causality and induction (that if something is true in one place, it is true elsewhere), which are themselves a product of synthetic thinking.
This is an innocent question. I believe you addressed it, or maybe it is simply not a valid question, but I could not find any discussion of the issue.
Answer
You could ask this question about any explanation that is offered, since every explanation relies on logic, and one can always challenge logic itself. The alternative is total skepticism that accepts nothing. Just as we analyze our thinking by using thinking itself, so too I bring evidence for synthetic thinking from the fact that it is consistent.
Specifically regarding your question, it is even easier. First, causality is not relevant here, only induction. And regarding induction, I can bring evidence at least for the fact that I have abilities that worked correctly in the past. That too is something. The question of whether to use them in the future is a different discussion.