so called 'a priori' knowledge is really just knowledge
after the fact

the fact that is of an epistemic assertion - statement

we evaluate the status of such - decide its status

this activity - reflective activity - is

knowledge about knowledge - or a statement about the
epistemic status of the original knowledge claim -

this can go on to the development of a theory of
knowledge

which then can be spoken of and used 'prior to'
an epistemic assertion

forget the temporal dimensions here

and just think logically

any epistemic claim of any form comes with an
evaluation

'the rose is red' - i.e. - may be an apparently
obvious - unreflective statement - clear cut -
uncontraversial

but think on it - to use that phrase - with such
an understanding presupposes - or assumes an
evaluation

and its not as if the evaluation is made after
the fact - it is a dimension of the assertion

reflectively we may break down the statement
to it's simple assertion and then its
evaluation

now the evaluation of such statements -
the epistemic evaluation - is given in the
assertion

I make the statement because I know it to be so
- to be true

of course I could be wrong but this is another
matter - that emerges if it emerges on
reflection

and I would go further to say any claim to
knowledge is just this - assertion -

a bold assertion - in the face of the unknown

on reflection such assertions - the idea of
knowledge can be at the very least queried

but the natural way of things is for people
to assert knowledge -

this is as natural as grass growing

we come to consider a skeptical view -
only when life reveals the groundlessness
of such assertions