nonempirical

Nonempirical refers to knowledge, reasoning, or methods that do not rely on observation or experience as the primary basis for justification. It stands in contrast to empirical approaches, which derive evidence from sensory data, experiments, or measurements. The term is often used in philosophy, mathematics, theology, and theoretical sciences to describe arguments or models that are not directly tested against the natural world.

In philosophy, nonempirical reasoning is closely associated with rationalism and a priori knowledge—claims that can be known independently of experience. Examples include logical truths and mathematical theorems, whose certainty is usually argued to come from deduction and definitions rather than empirical verification. Nonempirical arguments can also appear in metaphysical or theological debates, where conclusions are drawn from concepts, thought experiments, or revealed premises rather than observation.

In mathematics and logic, proofs are typically nonempirical: they begin with axioms and derive conclusions through formal deduction, without appeal to physical evidence. In theoretical science, researchers may develop models or theories that are initially nonempirical, later tested against data; such work often proceeds in a nonempirical phase to establish coherence, scope, and internal consistency.

Critics of nonempirical methods emphasize the limits of justification without observation, arguing that empirical testing is essential to verify claims about the real world. Proponents note that nonempirical reasoning can provide foundational insights, clarify concepts, and generate testable hypotheses. In practice, many disciplines combine nonempirical reasoning with empirical validation to build robust knowledge.