161
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
In [[Carnap (1937c)|“The Logical Syntax of Language”]] (1934, English Tran. 1937), Carnap formulates the distinction between analytic and synthetic statements in a boarder context of linguistic frameworks. For Carnap, a linguistic framework of science is comprised of two kinds of rules:[[CiteRef::Friedman (2002)]]
# '''L-Rules ''' – laws of logic and mathematics, these are analytical statements.# '''P-Rules ''' – physical and empirical laws based on sensory experience that have factual content, these are synthetic statements.
By defining the rules of the framework, Carnap is able to give a syntactic formulation of logical consequence, where L-rules are logically determined and are independent of experience and defined as analytic a priori. Statements that are not logically determined are defined as synthetic statements.[[CiteRef::Murzi (2017)]] This formulation builds on the analytic/synthetic distinction made in the Aufbau, using a different taxonomy.
This view can be understood from Carnap’s works in two different ways:
# '''Strict Verification ''' – a scientific proposition should be completely and directly testable through elementary experience. # '''Verifiable in Principle ''' – a softer approach, stating that a scientific proposition is required to be conceptually testable, and is scientific even if no verifying or negating experience have been observed.
Different segments in the Aufbau can be understood either as strict or principally verifiable. Challenges with strict verification caused Carnap to drop this view later, as uncorroborated theories were considered unscientific.
===Theory Choice – Probability and Inductive Logic===
Throughout his career , Carnap has attempted in different formulations to employ the tools of probability and induction to the question of theory choice. Carnap’s motivation is to use these tools to produce a quantitative assessment to a degree of confirmation of a scientific theory.[[CiteRef::Zabell (2008)]] Carnap’s inductive logic attempts to formulate a logical relationship between a scientific statement or theory and a single observational evidence supporting that statement. If successful, this will solve Hume’s problem of induction by shifting from absolute certainty to different degrees of confirmations that will allow to rationally choose between two competing scientific theories.[[CiteRef::Murzi (2017)]] This has been the focus of Carnap’s work from 1940s until he died, and although he tried numerous mathematical tools and logical formulations, he did not succeed in constructing a satisfactory theory of inductive logic.[[CiteRef::Friedman (2002)]]
|Criticism====Quine – Against Analytic/Synthetic Distinction and Verification Principle===
