from Hans-Johann Glock’s What is Analytic Philosophy?
Update:Courtesy of j, this older diagram of Carnap on the Vienna Circle:
28 May 2008 at 18:07
I’m guessing Glock really liked the Vienna Circle?
28 May 2008 at 19:15
Huh. The chart shows up on Google Reader, but not, now that I arrive here, in this post itself (on Firefox at least). What happened?
28 May 2008 at 20:37
Oops! Thanks Dave, I’ve fixed it now.
Jake: Glock has a sympathy for the Vienna Circle over Ryle or Quine, but he’s still not happy about their total rejection of metaphysics and philosophical indifference to politics. (Though he points out that most of the Vienna Circle had very strong politics indeed, which just weren’t reflected in their philosophy, aside from the unstated assumption that reason and the abandonment of metaphysics/religion/superstition will lead to a rational, liberal, just society.)
28 May 2008 at 21:11
are those supposed to be things had, or pursued, or professed to be had or pursued?
the resemblance makes me think this chart was modeled after carnap’s own:
29 May 2008 at 16:05
That’s a nice one, I’ve never seen it before. Even more interesting is how every view is divided into before/during/after Tractatus.
These are things had, at least according to Glock. As can be seen, a number of them are debatable… (Gotta love the “argument” and “clarity” items though.)
29 May 2008 at 20:28
I’d at least put a paren around the idea that TLP rejects science, and a paren around the idea that WVQ doesn’t reject metaphysics. Cool chart though.
30 May 2008 at 09:54
I see Schlick is claiming that he knew die Definition ist eine Festsetzung even before the Tractatus. Poser.
30 May 2008 at 20:42
i still find it remarkable how a profession full of people who have to spend part of their time inducting students into their tradition can say with a straight face that their canonical texts are ‘clear’.
About the author
Send me an E-mail
© 2019 Waggish
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑