Braithwaite R. B., Russell Bertrand, Waismann Friedrich. The Relevance of Psychology to Logic: A Symposium. Aristotelian Society. Verifiability · F. Waismann. In Gilbert Ryle & Antony Flew (eds.), Journal of The Principle of Lazerowitz – – Mind 46 () Friedrich Waismann. Verifiability (Part II of a symposium). Aristotelian Society, supplementary volume XIX (), pp. – – Volume
|Published (Last):||14 May 2004|
|PDF File Size:||15.3 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.97 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
To meet the preceding difficulties the later formulations of the verifiability principle require of a meaningful statement that it should be related to a set of observation statements in such a way that they provide not conclusive verifiability but simply some degree of evidential support for the original statement.
Nevertheless, waismwnn purely formal objections aside, the main difficulty of both Carnap’s and Hempel’s treatment of the verifiability principle is that of giving an adequate characterization of an empiricist language. In its later formulations it is presented simply as a criterion for determining whether a sentence is cognitively or factually meaningful.
F. Waismann, Verifiability – PhilPapers
To say simply that two statements have the same meaning is not to say what either statement means or what it is for either verifiqbility to be meaningful. For example, the statement that expresses the principle of causality in effect determines a class of statements, namely, the class of causal statements, but obviously it is not itself a causal statement. Request removal from index. It was sometimes suggested that conclusive falsifiability verifiabilit than conclusive verifiability should be the criterion of a cognitively meaningful statement.
It is evident that if a form of language can be used to describe the world — that is, to make statements — its rules cannot be fruedrich syntactical, that is, of the kind that govern simply the formation and transformation of sentences in the language.
The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap. Ayer – – Mind 45 But, more strictly, we shall understand the verifiability principle as claiming that the cognitive meaning or meaningfulness of a sentence is to be determined by reference to the verifiability or falsifiability of the statement expressed by the sentence.
Kneale – – Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 19 1: Baylis – – Journal of Symbolic Vreifiability 19 3: See also Basic Statements ; Logical Positivism.
For the kind of clarification that is being sought we now need a different and independent explanation of the meaning of an observation statement. Lodder – – Artificial Intelligence and Law 2 2: The fourth criterion is the most liberal and admits into the class of meaningful statements empirical statements of the various kinds that were excluded by the requirement of conclusive waissmann or the requirement of conclusive falsifiability.
No keywords specified fix it. In either case, there is the difficulty of explaining how these statements are related to the experiences that would verify them.
But this does not clarify what the meaning of S is, or what it is for S to be meaningful. And Wittgenstein, in the Tractatussaid explicitly, “To understand a proposition means to know what is the case if it is true. The controversial questions concerning the principle verifiabiljty The onus of proof frieedrich show that such experiences are possible plainly rests upon the philosopher in question.
Ayer, and other logical positivists in numerous publications. But even if such experiences do occur, and are of such a kind that they can be associated, via semantic rules, with the descriptive expressions of a language, this will not provide an exception to the requirement laid down by the verifiability principle — it will, in fact, be simply an extension of that requirement to types of sentences that formerly could not be understood as expressing statements of fact.
Reichenbach on Scientific Realism. But — leaving aside sentences expressing analytic statements — for a sentence to have “cognitive,” “factual,” “descriptive,” or “literal” meaning for example, “The sun is 93 million miles from the earth” it was held that it must express a statement that could, at least in principle, be shown to be true or false, or to some degree probable, by reference to empirical observations.
Was Carnap a Complete Verificationist in the Aufbau? Mill, and Ernst Mach. To meet these objections some other early formulations of the principle identified the meaning of a statement with that of some finite conjunction of statements directly reporting empirical observations. Review of Ayer’s Language, Truth and Logic2nd ed.
This article has no associated abstract. In their early formulations Waismann, Schlick, and others held that the cognitive meaning of a sentence is determined completely by the experiences that would verify it conclusively. For a further examination of this question, it would seem that the correct approach would be to give a completely general analysis of “knowing the use of a predicate.
A statement is what is expressed in certain circumstances by an indicative sentence, and the same statement may be expressed by different sentences in the same or in different languages; a statement is properly said to be true or false, it does stand in logical relations to other statements, and it is verifiable or falsifiable. Sign in Create an account. If the waizmann in question express statements, the use of the predicates that occur in them must be governed by semantic rules; how can these rules be known or explained to anyone else if the states waksmann affairs which the sentences are verifiabjlity to describe are not wasimann in any way at all?
This article has no associated abstract.
But then, if the possibility of mystical or religious experiences is allowed, it seems that at least some metaphysical statements are verifiable and therefore meaningful. What is the Reason criedrich This Rule? David Wzismann – – Inquiry: History of Western Philosophy. Science Logic and Mathematics. It has also been thought to be of importance for the criterion of weak verifiability or confirmability, for, it has been said, unless basic statements are certain, or in some sense incorrigible, no other statement can be even probable or confirmable.