Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-g5lq8 Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-11-03T15:59:27.892Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testability and Meaning—Continued

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Rudolf Carnap
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is not the aim of the present essay to defend the principle of empiricism against apriorism or anti-empiricist metaphysics. Taking empirism for granted, we wish to discuss, the question what is meaningful. The word ‘meaning’ will here be taken in its empiricist sense; an expression of language has meaning in this sense if we know how to use it in speaking about empirical facts, either actual or possible ones. Now our problem is what expressions are meaningful in this sense. We may restrict this question to sentences because expressions other than sentences are meaningful if and only if they can occur in a meaningful sentence.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , January 1937 , pp. 1 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ayer, ,∗ [1] Language, Truth and Logic, London 1936.Google Scholar
Bridgman, P. W. [1] The Logic of Modern Physics. New York 1927.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. [1] Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Berlin (now F. Meiner, Leipzig) 1928.Google Scholar
[2a] Die physikalische Sprache als Universalsprache der Wissenschaft. Erkenntnis 2, 1932.Google Scholar
[2b] (Translation:) The Unity of Science. Kegan Paul, London 1934.Google Scholar
[3] Ueber Protokollsätze. Erkenntnis 3, 1932.Google Scholar
[4a] Logische Syntax der Sprache. Springer, Wien 1934.Google Scholar
[4b] (Translation:) Logical Syntax of Language. Kegan Paul, London, (Harcourt, Brace, New York) 1936.Google Scholar
[5] Philosophy and Logical Syntax. Kegan Paul, London 1935.Google Scholar
[6] Formalwissenschaft und Realwissenschaft. Erkenntnis 5, 1935. (Congress [1]).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7] Ueber ein Gültigkeitskriterium für die Sätze der klassischen Mathematik. Monatsh. Math. Phys. 42, 1935.Google Scholar
[8] Les Concepts Psychologiques et les Concepts Physiques sont-ils Foncièrement Différents? Revue de Synthèse 10, 1935.Google Scholar
[9] Wahrheit und Bewährung. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
[10] Von der Erkenntnistheorie zur Wissenschaftslogik. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
[11] Ueber die Einheitssprache der Wissenschaft. Logische Bemerkungen zur Enzyklopädie. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
[12] Gibt es nicht-prüfbare Voraussetzungen der Wissenschaft? Scientia, 1936.Google Scholar
Congress [1] Einheit der Wissenschaft. Bericht über die Prager Vorkonferenz der Internationalen Kongresse für Einheit der Wissenschaft, Sept. 1934. Erkenntnis 5, Heft 1-3, 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
∗[2] Erster Internationaler Kongress für Einheit der Wissenschaft (Congrès Internat. de Philos. Scientifique), Paris 1935. [Report of Sessions.] Erkenntnis 5, Heft 6, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
∗[3] Actes du Ier Congrès Internat, de Philos. Scientifique, Paris 1935. 8 fasc. Hermann & Cie, Paris 1936.Google Scholar
Ducasse, C. J. ∗[1] Verification, Verifiability and Meaningfulness. Journ. of Philos. 33, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feigl, H. ∗[1] Sense and Nonsense in Scientific Realism. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
Frank, Ph. [1] Das Kausalgesetz und seine Grenzen. Springer, Wien, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. [1] Beiträge zur logischen Analyse des Wahrheitsbegriffs. Diss. Berlin, 1934.Google Scholar
[2] Ueber den Gehalt von Wahrscheinlichkeitsaussagen. Erkenntnis 5, 1935.Google Scholar
[3] On the Logical Positivist's Theory of Truth. Analysis 2, 1935.Google Scholar
[4] Some Remarks on ‘Facts’ and Propositions. Analysis 2, 1935.Google Scholar
Hilbert, D. und Ackermann, W. [1] Grundzüge der theoritischen Logik. Springer, Berlin, 1928.Google Scholar
Kaufmann, F. [1] Das Unendliche in der Mathematik und seine Ausschaltung. Deuticke, Wien 1930.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. I., [1] with Langtord, C. H. Symbolic Logic. The Century Co., New York 1932.Google Scholar
[2] Experience and Meaning. Philos. Review 43, 1934.Google Scholar
Morris, Ch. W. [1] Philosophy of Science and Science of Philosophy. Philos. of Sc. 2, 1935.Google Scholar
[2] The Concept of Meaning in Pragmatism and Logical Positivism. Proc. 8th Internat. Congr. Philos. (1934). Prague 1936.Google Scholar
[3] Semiotic and Scientific Empiricism. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
Nagel, E. [1] Verifiability, Truth, and Verification. Journ. of Philos. 31, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
∗[2] Impressions and Appraisals of Analytic Philosophy in Europe. Journ. of Philos. 33, 1936.Google Scholar
Ness, A. ∗[1] Erkenntnis und wissenschaftliches Verhalten. Norske Vid.-Akad. II. Hist.-Fil. Kl., No. 1. Oslo 1936.Google Scholar
Neurath, O. [1] Physicalism. Monist 41, 1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Physikalismus. Scientia 50, 1931.Google Scholar
[3] Soziologie im Physikalismus. Erkenntnis 2, 1931.Google Scholar
[4] Protokollsätze. Erkenntnis 3, 1932.Google Scholar
[5] Radikaler Physikalismus und “wirkliche Welt.” Erkenntnis 4, 1934.Google Scholar
[6] Pseudorationalismus der Falsifikation. Erkenntnis 5, 1935.Google Scholar
∗[7] Le Développement du Cercle du Vienne et l'Avenir de l'Empirisme Logique. Hermann, Paris 1935.Google Scholar
∗[8] Einzelwissenschaften, Einheitswissenschaft, Pseudorationalismus. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
Popper, K. [1] Logik der Forschung. Springer, Wien 1935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
∗[2] Empirische Methode. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
Ramsey, F. P. [1] General Propositions and Causality. 1929. Published posthumously in: The Foundations of Mathematics, and other Logical Essays, p. 237–255. Harcourt, Brace, New York 1931.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. [1] Wahrscheinlichkeitslehre. Sijthoff, Leyden 1935.Google Scholar
∗[2] Ueber Induktion und Wahrscheinlichkeit. Erkenntnis 5, 1935.Google Scholar
∗[3] Logistic Empiricism in Germany and the Present State of its Problems. Journ. of Philos. 33, 1936.Google Scholar
∗[4] L'Empirisme Logistique et la Désaggrégation de l'Apriori. In: Congress [3].Google Scholar
Russell, B. [1] see Whitehead.Google Scholar
[2] Our Knowledge of the External World. Open Court, Chicago and London 1914.Google Scholar
Russell, L. J. [1] Communication and Verification. Proc. Arist. Soc, Suppl. Vol. 13, 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlick, M. [1] Die Kausalität in der gegenwärtigen Physik. Naturwiss. 19, 1931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2] Ueber das Fundament der Erkenntnis. Erkenntnis 4, 1934.Google Scholar
[3] Facts and Propositions. Analysis 2, 1935.Google Scholar
[4] Meaning and Verification. Philos. Review 45, 1936.Google Scholar
Stace, W. T. ∗[1] Metaphysics and Meaning. Mind 44, 1935.Google Scholar
Stebbing, S. L. [1] Communication and Verification. Proc. Arist. Soc, Suppl. Vol. 13. 1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarski, A. ∗[1] Der Wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten Sprachen. Stud. Philos. 1, 1936.Google Scholar
Waismann, F. [1] Logische Analyse des Wahrscheinlichkeitsbegriffs. Erkenntnis 1, 1930.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weyl, H. [1] Die heutige Erkenntnislage in der Mathematik. Symposion 1, 1925; also published separately.Google Scholar
Whitehead, A. N. and Russell, B. [1] Principia Mathematica. (1910-12) 2nd ed. Cambridge 1925-27.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. [1] Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Harcourt, Brace, New York 1922.Google Scholar