Two Dogmas of Empiricism

Against to two central tenets of Logical Positivists: "The Two Dogmas"

  1. Analytic / Synthetic Distinction
  2. Reductionism (Verificationism)

Quine believes that the two dogmas are essentially the same

"The two dogmas are, indeed, at root identical."

 

 

 

1. Dogma 1: The Analytic / Synthetic Distinction

1.1 Analyticity

  • Definition

    is Analytic can be turned into a logical truth by replacing synonyms with synonyms

  • Key Question: What does it mean for a statement to be analytic?

    • True in virtue of meaning

      Quine: "what a meaning is" is difficult to answer

      A platonic form? A psychological entity?

      If you want to ground all the a priori knowledge by saying that we can reflect / infer everything just by knowing the meaning of words, that does not look good

      Because even the meaning of words is empirical matter now

      At this point of his paper, Quine is skeptical about meaning

    • True by definition

      Definition? Why should your definition of "Bachelor" as an "Unmarried Man" be the one that holds?

      Many people will appeal to the authority of the dictionary for definitions, but

      Quine: Dictionary does not stipulate the meaning of words, it is just a reference of existing uses.

    • True in virtue of synonym

      To use Interchangeability (Salva Veritate) Test to define Analyticity

  • Analytical Truth

    1. Logical Truth

      "No married man is not married"

    2. True by Definition

      "No married man is a bachelor"

      If you sub in "Bachelor" with "Unmarried Man" then it becomes logical truth

    If a truth is analytic, then you cannot deny it without contradicting yourself

  • Analytic Statement

    (Two Dogmas of Empiricism)

    Quine: "An analytic statement is that limiting case which is confirmed no matter what."

 

 

1.2 Salva Veritate & Synonym

  • Salva Veritate: Two expressions can substitute each other in all contexts without change of Truth-Value

  • Synonym: If two words can Salva Veritate, then they are synonyms

    Example

    • No bachelor is tall - FALSE
    • No unmarried man is tall - FALSE

    Therefore, "bachelor" and "unmarried man" could Salva Veritate, and they are synonyms

  • Quine: This doesn't work either

    Example

    • I have a bachelor of science in physics

      I have a unmarried man of science in physics

    • I have good penmanship

      I have good penadultmalehumanship

    Obviously "bachelor of science" or "penmanship" should be viewed as a unit

  • Naïve Salva Veritate is also not a good test

    Example

    It turns out that all cordates are renates, and all renates are cordates

    You can interchange renate & cordate while keeping the Truth-Value of the sentence

    • Tracy is renate - TRUE
    • Tracy is cordate - TRUE

    BUT renate & cordate are words of different meanings!

    • I think Scooby-Doo is renate - TRUE
    • I think Scooby-Doo is cordate - FALSE

    You are entirely free to believe that Scooby-Doo is a renate but not a cordate, and to determine the Truth-Values of the two sentences based on that belief!

    Quine: No! This is illegitimate language!

  • Two Types of Language

    • Extensional

      The Truth-Value of a sentence ONLY depends on the object (extension) referred to by the words

      • Substituting co-denoting terms doesn't change Truth-Value

        Both extensions of Hesperus and Phosphorus are Venus

      • Substituting co-extensive predicates doesn't change Truth-Value

        In biology, the set of objects (extensions) covered by Renate and Cordate is identical

    • Intensional

    Example

    • Extensional Definition of "Bachelor"

      a listing of all the unmarried men in the world

    • Intensional Definition of "Bachelor"

      "Unmarried Man"

  • Quine holds that

    • Extensional Language is the only legitimate language
    • Intensional Language is illegitimate and cannot push science forward

 

 

1.3 Necessarily

  • "Necessarily"

    Quine notes that the Interchangeability (Salva Veritate) Test can be improved by introducing "necessarily / it had to be the case", thereby distinguishing genuine cognitive synonyms from words that merely share the same extension

    Example

    • We can show that Renate and Cordate are not synonyms

      • It had to be the case that all renate animals are renate - True
      • It had to be the case that all renate animals are cordate - False

      We can imagine a creature to have a heart but no kidneys, though such a creature does not exist in reality

    • We can show that Bachelor and Unmarried Man are synonyms

      • It had to be the case that all bachelors are bachelors - True
      • It had to be the case that all bachelors are unmarried man -True

      We cannot image a bachelor who is not an unmarried man, otherwise there would be self-contradiction

  • However, Quine holds that "necessarily / it had to be the case" is illegitimate

    Because when you say "It had to be the case that " is actually saying that " is an Analytical Truth"

    Example

    • It had to be the case that all bachelors are bachelors - True
    • It had to be the case that all bachelors are unmarried man -True

    This is an Interchangeability (Salva Veritate) Test

    "Bachelors are Unmarried Man" is an Analytical Truth

    It is trivial to use Interchangeability (Salva Veritate) to define Analyticity (see 1.1)

    Huh???

 

 

1.4 Circular Reasoning

This is the circular reasoning we have throughout the problem of Analyticity

Quine concludes that the notion of Analyticity is bunk, and so should be rejected

 

 

 

2. Dogma 2: Reductionism (Verificationism)

All statements can be reduced to sense experience

  • Quine: Statements cannot get verified or falsified

    Corporate Body: You are always pre-assuming things when observing

    Quine in Two Dogmas of Empiricism: "... our statements about the external world face the tribunal of sense experience not individually but only as a corporate body."

    Example

    "Galileo's finding was doubted because of the illusions in the instrument"

    This disconfirming statement is actually related to the assumption that the instrument functions properly

  • Putnam: Stipulation is no different from hypothesis

    There's no principle distinction between matter of fact and logical truth

    Example

    In Newtonian physics, kinetic energy is stipulated by

    Centuries later...

    In Einsteinian physics, kinetic energy is stipulated by

 

 

 

3. Coherentism (Quine Positive Picture)

coherentism vs foundationalism

  • Foundationalism

    Traditional picture, the chain of reasoning is like a tree

  • Coherentism

    Proposed in Quine's The Web of Belief, the chain of reasoning is like a network

    1. Every belief is subject to revision

      Including those logical beliefs and "analytic truths"

    2. Beliefs differ not in kind but in degree

      Kind = analytic / synthetic

      Degree = strongly / weakly held

    3. Beliefs at the periphery are less central to our overall belief systems, and so less costly to revise

      As such, principles of rationality prima-facie push us to revise those beliefs instead of ones closer to the center

      Beliefs towards the outside are such beliefs as

      • "There are no centaurs"
      • "Electrons exist"

    What Quine proposed is different from Logical Positivist: Philosophy and Science are the same