The philosophical view that only statements verifiable either logically or empirically would be cognitively meaningful.

learn more… | top users | synonyms

4
votes
6answers
159 views

In idealism, how can you prove that God is the One who created the Universe?

In philosophy, idealism is the group of philosophies which assert that reality, or reality as we can know it, is fundamentally mental, mentally constructed, or otherwise immaterial. ...
0
votes
0answers
122 views

Carl Hempel's covering law model of explanation in history

According to Carl Hempel in "The Function of General Laws in History" (The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 39, No. 2, 1942, pp. 35-48), explanation in history consists of the "derivation of the ...
8
votes
3answers
522 views

How did the logical positivists respond to Gödel's incompleteness theorem?

In a lecture on philosophy of science I recently listened to, it was stated that Quine was the one who decisively refuted the logical positivist program. I've also read that Quine and Popper were ...
2
votes
3answers
105 views

What is the difference between the illogical and the nonsensical?

In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein mentions the following: "3.03 Thought can never be of anything illogical, since, if it were, we should have to think illogically." "3.032 It is as impossible to ...
4
votes
1answer
70 views

Did the Logical Positivists accept synthetic a priori knowledge?

My understanding of Logical Positivists is that, following Wittgenstein, they accepted only 2 types of proposition as meaningful: Propositions based on formal logic (i.e. tautologies) Empirically ...
3
votes
2answers
55 views

Normativity in Science

According to the description of language and norms in Analytic Philosophy (and especially in the way Rorty talks about it in Contingency Irony and Solidarity) we cannot judge one vocabulary using our ...
4
votes
4answers
280 views

A proposition is non-falsifiable. So what?

Does Karl Popper argue that non-falsifiable theories are not true/have no truth value, or simply that they are not provable? Put another way: according to Popper, could a non-falsifiable theory ...
3
votes
5answers
187 views

Does anyone argue that Karl Popper's theory of critical rationalism does not meet its own conditions?

I am a huge fan of Dr. Popper's work, and particularly his theory that the property of falsifiability separates the scientific from the non-scientific. However, it struck me that this theory does not ...
1
vote
1answer
66 views

Would a logical positivist consider a proposition about objects outside of the earth's light cone to be meaningful?

The logical positivists' basic premise was that for any statement to be meaningful, one had to be able to confirm its truth or falsehood using formal logic and empirical observation. Any statement ...
1
vote
3answers
74 views

Logical Positivism, Linguistic Philosophy, then came what?

In this interview with philosopher Bernard Williams interviewer Bryan Magee suggests: Logical Positivism was the prevailing orthodoxy of one generation, Linguistic Philosophy of the next. Is ...
4
votes
3answers
512 views

Is homeopathy verifiable?

Would homeopathy be verifiable according to the logic positivists (and thus science)? On the one hand, one could, in principle, observe patients recovering after being given a homeopathic medicine. ...
0
votes
0answers
27 views

Reference suggestions - Contemporary Western Philosophy

I want to read following topics Moore, Russell and Early Wittgenstein: Defence of Commonsense; Refutation of Idealism; Logical Atomism; Logical Constructions; Incomplete Symbols; ...
2
votes
2answers
321 views

Dialectic vs Logical positivism

Dialectic is opposite to Metaphysic. Also Logical positivism criticizes Metaphysic since in Logical positivism only statements verifiable either logically or empirically would be cognitively ...
6
votes
1answer
415 views

How do Logical Positivists respond to the “Positivism is self-defeating” argument

Positivism asserts that any statement that cannot be empirically tested is meaningless. But obviously, this is a self-refuting statement, because it can't be empirically verified as well. How do the ...
6
votes
1answer
113 views

How might a modern defender of positivism classify a “speech act”?

A few people here have wondered whether positivism is really dead. I was under the impression that it was for a long time; but there seem to be some sympathizers with positivism here, and I'd be ...
1
vote
2answers
120 views

Help me understand Logical Positivists points

I am studying Logical Positivism on my own, and though I get the most of it, I am confused about some points, and I will be really grateful if you can help me here. I am studying it from here. In the ...
3
votes
1answer
427 views

Does Gödel's second incompleteness theorem interact with logical positivism?

Gödel's second incompleteness theorem (GSIT), informally stated, says: For any formal effectively generated theory T including basic arithmetical truths and also certain truths about formal ...
6
votes
1answer
208 views

To what extent did the logical positivists actually reject traditional philosophy?

Logical positivism is often taught as one of the three new schools of philosophy, together with pragmatism and phenomenology, that went against traditional philosophy in a radical manner. While I am ...
10
votes
1answer
1k views

Is Hume's Fork self-refuting?

David Hume wrote: If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it ...
5
votes
2answers
3k views

How to distinguish between 'a priori/posteriori' and 'analytic/synthetic'?

What I think I know A priori knowledge that can be gained by contemplating only the meaning of a statement's words. A posteriori knowledge can be gained only by comparing a statement's meaning with ...
6
votes
1answer
186 views

How to express Kant's notion of existence on first-order logic according to Ayer?

In Language, Truth, and Logic, Ayer writes: [As] Kant pointed out, existence is not an attribute. For, when we ascribe an attribute to a thing, we covertly assert that it exists. However, I ...
11
votes
5answers
1k views

Logical positivism today

John Passmore in 1967 said that logical positivism "...is dead, or as dead as a philosophical movement ever becomes." Are there any modern philosophers that advocate logical positivism the same ...
7
votes
4answers
932 views

Should we not talk about ethics according to Wittgenstein?

Wittgenstein says in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: 6.4 All propositions are of equal value. 6.41 The sense of the world must lie outside the world. In the world everything is as it is ...
18
votes
2answers
6k views

What are/were the main criticisms of logical positivism?

Logical positivism, later called logical empiricism, was a school of analytic philosophy famously connected with the Vienna circle and with a significant following up until the 1950's. What were the ...
13
votes
1answer
387 views

What did John Passmore mean when he reported that logical positivism “is dead”?

The philosophical school of logical positivism (which later became known as "logical empiricism") was a type of analytic philosophy that attempted to combine empiricism with rationalist epistemology. ...
14
votes
1answer
829 views

Should Wittgenstein be given some credit for Godel's incompleteness theorem?

Is there a connection between Wittgenstein's argument against the "Theory of Types" and the proof of Godel's Incompleteness Theorem? Being only semi-knowledgeable, I will draw the connection of which ...
15
votes
3answers
1k views

What are some ways to read Wittgenstein's Tractatus other than resolute/irresolute?

There are, at present, two dominant ways to read Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (TLP). One is called the irresolute reading, the other the resolute reading. The irresolute reading ...