Intuition and evidential facts in Carnap’s analysis of space

Juan Bautista Bengoetxea

Resumo


One of the reasons for Carnap’s (1922) analysis of space was the confounding status of many arguments around the state of the art on that topic at that time. The unsatisfactory views supplied by mathematicians, physicists and philosophers led Carnap to propose a new conception of space. His proposal, which employs the notion of intuition as a fundamental tool, fared better, but clashed with his conventionalists intentions derived from an allegedly tolerant attitude. The notion of intuition here examined allows us to claim that Carnap’s target was also an objectivist epistemological program dependent on certain realistic reminiscences embodied in the notion of evidence or matter of fact (Tatbestand).


Palavras-chave


Objectivity, Intuition, Conventionalism, Evidence, Tolerance

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referências


BENGOETXEA, J.B. Representación implícita y nada que representar: Crítica al Der Raum de Carnap. In: FALGUERA, J.L., RIVAS, U., SAGÜILLO, J.M. (eds.). La filosofía analítica en el cambio de milenio. Santiago de Compostela: USC, pp. 273-283, 1999.

CARNAP, R. Der Raum: Ein Beitrag zur Wissenschaftlehre. Vaduz: Topos Verlag, 1922 (1978).

CARNAP, R. The Logical Construction of the World and Pseudoproblems in Philosophy. Chicago: Open Court, 1928 (2005).

CARNAP, R. The Logical Syntax of Language. London: Routledge & Kegan, 1934 (1971).

CASSIRER, E. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. New York: Dover, 1921 (1953).

COFFA, J. A. The Semantic Tradition from Kant to Carnap: To the Vienna Station. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

FRIEDMAN, M. Foundations of Space-Time Theories: Relativistic Physics and Philosophy of Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1983.

FRIEDMAN, M. Kant and the Exact Sciences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992.

FRIEDMAN, M. Reconsidering Logical Positivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

FRIEDMAN, M. A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger. Chicago: Open Court, 2001.

GEROCH, R.; JANG, P.S. Motion of a body in general relativity. Journal of Mathematical Physics, v. 16, pp. 65-67, 1975.

HAACK, S. Carnap's Aufbau: Some Kantian Reflexions. Ratio, v. 19, pp. 170-176, 1977.

HOWARD, D. Relativity, Eindeutigkeit, and Monomorphism: Rudolf Carnap and the Development of the Categoricity Concept in Formal Semantics. In: GIERE, R.N., RICHARDSON, A.W. (eds.). Origins of Logical Positivism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 115-164, 1996.

KANT, I. Critique of Pure Reason. New York: St. Martin's, 1781 (1965).

MORMANN, T. New Work for Carnap’s Quasi-Analysis. Journal of Philosophical Logic, v. 38, pp. 249-282, 2009.

MORMANN, T. Toward a Theory of the Pragmatic A Priori: From Carnap to Lewis and Beyond. In: CREATH, R. (ed.). Rudolf Carnap and the Legacy of Logical Empiricism. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 113-132, 2012.

NERLICH, G. The Shape of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

REICHENBACH, H. The Philosophy of Space and Time. New York: Dover, 1928 (1957).

RICHARDSON, A. Carnap’s construction of the world: The Aufbau and the emergence of logical empiricism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

RUNGGALDIER, E. Carnap’s Early Conventionalism: An Inquiry into the Historical Background of the Vienna Circle. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1984.

SAUER, W. On the Kantian Background of Neopositivism. Topoi, v. 8, pp. 111-19, 1989.

UEBEL, T. Rediscovering the Forgotten Vienna Circle. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1991.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7213/1980-5934.31.054.AO01

Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.




Direitos autorais 2019 Editora Universitária Champagnat