According to Wikipedia's entry on the Berlin Circle, the terms logical empiricism and logical positivism are largely used interchangably. To wit:

The Berlin Circle had much in common with the Vienna Circle, but the philosophies of the circles differed on a few subjects, such as probability and conventionalism. Reichenbach insisted on calling his philosophy logical empiricism, to distinguish it from the logical positivism of the Vienna Circle. Few people today make the distinction, and the words are often used interchangeably.

Why did Reichenbach try to distinguish his positions, or those of the Berlin Circle from those of his Austrian counterparts? How has it come that most philosophers do not distinguish between the two outlooks?

  • Probably because few care today about the fine points that they did differ on. Most consider both versions untenable, and sympathetic readers, like Friedman, try to take the best from both and modernize it. Are you asking for a review of the differences? – Conifold Nov 11 '19 at 0:07
  • 1
    First I did a search for Reichenbach vs Quine and that led to some material that may shed some light, I’m not sure. Then I just entered in Carnap Reichenbach and got this totally unexpected paper. homepage.univie.ac.at/christian.damboeck/texte/… The whole area is not my area of knowledge but if you are interested in this matters here is another thing for your stack. Perhaps the Berlin crowd was considered “softer” than the Vienna. – Gordon Nov 11 '19 at 2:52
  • Excuse me not R vs Quine but Carnap vs Quine. I bring Carnap in because he seemed to want to go his own way, a bit of an outlier, and I noticed he edited a Journal with Reichenbach. (Wikipedia) – Gordon Nov 11 '19 at 3:03
  • 1
    See Berlin circle : Reichenbach was a "leader" and he generated his own movement. Then "[Berlin circle] joined up with the Vienna Circle; together they published the journal Erkenntnis that was edited by both Rudolf Carnap and Hans Reichenbach, and they organized several congresses on scientific philosophy. " Conclusion: no deep difference. Reichenbach was more interested in philosophy of physics, while Carnap switched to logic and foundations... – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Nov 11 '19 at 10:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.