The logical empiricist picture of the world

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 contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.

— David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, 1777, Section XII, Part 3

I made this diagram as an attempted summary of logical empiricism.1

Question
neither
a posteriori
analytic

A priori / analytic / necessary ?

Or

A posteriori / synthetic / contingent ?

Or

Neither ?

Bayesianism / Science

no
yes

Do we feel a sense of confusion, a feeling that there is a truly meaningful question to be answered?

Commit it then to the flames!

Philosophical clarification

Logic
Examples:
Principia Mathematica
Peano axioms
Development of predicate logic
Examples:
On denoting
Use-mention distinction
Two concepts of liberty
Meaning
Reason
Modality
Kantian thesis:
necessary iff a priori
Neo-Fregean thesis:
analytic iff a priori
Carnapian thesis:
necessary iff analytic
Golden Triangle
See Chalmers, "The Foundations of Two-Dimensional Semantics"

We can then think of various counters to logical empiricism within this framework. For example, Kripke denies the Kantian thesis. In “Two dogmas of empiricism”, Quine attacks all three vertices of the golden triangle. I may write a post about these in the future.

  1. The above construction, in javascript, might break one day. Backups are in .png and .xml

August 1, 2017
Read more:

Leave feedback on this post