Kant theorizes that synthetic a priori judgments are conceived before an event occurs. He makes the assumption that these synthetic a priori judgments are plausible without any empirical knowledge, exposure, experience, or any related comprehension. Ergo it is false to assume that synthetic a priori conclusions are not justifiable because the articulation of conscious and unconscious stimuli is an occurrence since birth.
             Kant explains that there are both analytic and synthetic judgments. Analytic judgments are those truths that are self-contained while synthetic judgments are the combining of two ideas to form a completely new idea. He also explains that there are both experiences that are a posteriori and those that are a priori. A posteriori is the knowledge that depends on experience and therefore is defined as 'after experience'. A priori on the other hand is knowledge that can be known 'prior to experience'.
             Knowing this, we can conclude that analytic a posteriori are not possible. One cannot have a self-contained knowledge of something after an experience. Kant also explains to us that analytic a priori are in fact possible. For instance, the statement 'all bodies are extended things' is an example of analytic a priori. This is because we know that this is true before seeing all of the bodies in the world. Analytic a priori are therefore
             rationalist statements. Rationalism is a theory that reason is in itself a source of knowledge superior to and independent of sense perceptions. 'A rainy day is a wet day' is an example of a statement that is both rationalist and analytic a priori. This is an analytic a priori judgment because we know that everyday that is a rainy day is also a wet day.
             On the other hand, if somebody were to say that 'a rainy day is a warm day' it would be an empirical statement. That is because we can only put these t...