Neo-positivist metaphysics
Philosophical Studies 160 (1):53-78 (2012)
| Abstract | Some philosophers argue that many contemporary debates in metaphysics are “illegitimate,” “shallow,” or “trivial,” and that “contemporary analytic metaphysics, a professional activity engaged in by some extremely intelligent and morally serious people, fails to qualify as part of the enlightened pursuit of objective truth, and should be discontinued” (Ladyman and Ross, Every thing must go: Metaphysics naturalized , 2007 ). Many of these critics are explicit about their sympathies with Rudolf Carnap and his circle, calling themselves ‘neo-positivists’ or ‘neo-Carnapians.’ Yet despite the fact that one of the main conclusions of logical positivism was that metaphysical statements are meaningless, many of these neo-positivists are themselves engaged in metaphysical projects. This paper aims to clarify how we may see a neo-positivist metaphysics as proceeding in good faith, one that starts with serious engagement with the findings of science, particularly fundamental physics, but also has room for traditional, armchair methods | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesCian Dorr (2010). Review of James Ladyman and Don Ross, Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2010 (6).
Alexander Naraniecki (2010). Neo-Positivist or Neo-Kantian? Karl Popper and the Vienna Circle. Philosophy 85 (4):511-530.
Tuomas E. Tahko (2012). In Defence of Aristotelian Metaphysics. In Tuomas E. Tahko (ed.), Contemporary Aristotelian Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press.
Volker Peckhaus (2008). Logic and Metaphysics: Heinrich Scholz and the Scientific World View. Philosophia Mathematica 16 (1):78-90.
Jonathan D. Jacobs (2007). Causal Powers: A Neo-Aristotelian Metaphysic. Dissertation, Indiana University
Helen Verran (2005). On Seeing the Generative Possibilities of Dalit Neo-Buddhist Thought. Social Epistemology 19 (1):33 – 48.
Marcus Rossberg & Philip A. Ebert (2007). What is the Purpose of Neo-Logicism? Traveaux de Logique 18:33-61.
Nick Zangwill (1992). Quietism. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 17 (1):160-176.
Christian Nimtz (2004). Two-Dimensionalism and Natural Kind Terms. Synthese 138 (1):125-48.
Lydia Patton (2010). Review of Makkreel and Luft, Eds., Neo-Kantianism in Contemporary Philosophy. [REVIEW] Philosophy in Review 30 (4):280-282.
Edouard Machery (2006). Two Dogmas of Neo-Empiricism. Philosophy Compass 1 (4):398–412.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2012-04-02Total downloads123 ( #4,021 of 549,198 )Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #7,855 of 549,198 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
