A Naturalist's Unnatural Criticism——On Quine's Rationality of Critiquing Distinction between Analytic and Synthetic Statements
Sun Shaohua
Abstract
Sun Shaohua
Abstract
The distinction between analytic and synthetic statements is the modern empiricist theoretical basis.Quine's refusal of the distinction on Two Dogmas is Empiricism is regarded as the most serious destruction to the modern empiricist theoretical basis.This paper calls in question the rationality of Quine's criticism,and also interprets the characteristics of his post-empiricism through reflecting the really philosophical intention of his criticism.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The distinction between analytic and synthetic statements is the modern empiricist theoretical basis.Quine's refusal of the distinction on Two Dogmas is Empiricism is regarded as the most serious destruction to the modern empiricist theoretical basis.This paper calls in question the rationality of Quine's criticism,and also interprets the characteristics of his post-empiricism through reflecting the really philosophical intention of his criticism.
Key concepts: Quine, Empiricism, Epistemology, Criticism, Philosophy, Rationality, Naturalism, Philosophy of science