[Wittrs] Re: The language game of html, again.
- From: "walto" <walterhorn@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:58:00 -0000
The claim that such venerable claims as "There is free will" and "There is no
free will" are nonsensical or meaningless or pointless claims about nothing at
all is precisely the position taken by the logical positivists, including
Carnap, Shlick, Waismann, and, at one point, Wittgenstein.
Perhaps their main problem was that such claims as "Meaning is the method of
verification" (and, for that "Meaning is use." are of the same type as "There
is free will."
W
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
>
> ... the point wasn't "Carnapian."
>
> SW
> ============
> >
> > I want to suggest quite clearly that there is more of philosophic
> > significance
>
> > revealed in this sort of thing than in a thousand years of disputation
> > about
> > "free will." Why do today's philosophers talk about nothing?
> >
>
> Spoken like a true Carnapian. Trouble is that that venerable old
> philosophical
> position that philosophical statements are actually nonsense/about nothing
> (logical positivism), was definitively refuted (by other philosophers),
> before
> you were born.
>
> W
>
Other related posts:
