Skip to main content
Log in

Every Dogma has its day

  • Published:
Erkenntnis Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper is a reexamination of “Two Dogmas” in the light of Quine's ongoing debate with Carnap over analyticity. It shows, first, that ‘analytic’ is a technical term within Carnap's epistemology. As such it is intelligible, and Carnap's position can meet Quine's objections. Second, it shows that the core of Quine's objection is that he (Quine) has an alternative epistemology to advance, one which appears to make no room for analyticity. Finally, the paper shows that Quine's alternative epistemology is itself open to very serious objections. Quine is not thereby refuted, but neither can Carnap's analyticity be dismissed as dogma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Creath, R. Every Dogma has its day. Erkenntnis 35, 347–389 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00388294

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00388294

Keywords

Navigation