|
清除形而上学： 逻辑实证主义的口号，是西方哲学史上反形而上学传统达到了顶点的表现。休谟想烧掉所有下面这样的书籍：其内容不能由我们的经验或关于数与量的抽象推理原则来核实。康德基于其对知识的本性和界限的考察来批判传统形而上学。另一方面，逻辑实证主义的攻击基于一种语言理论，它部分地来自于维特根斯坦的《逻辑哲学论》。逻辑实证主义者主张只有两类有意义的命题：形式命题，即逻辑和数学原理；事实命题，它们是可由经验证实的。关于诸如绝对、本质、超验实体和天命这类事物的形而上学命题实际上是胡说或是没有意义的，因为它们包含假语词，或者因为它们是假陈述，即语词的排列违反了逻辑句法规则及缺乏应用的标准，因此，形而上学破坏了规则，这是说任何话时如果实际上要是有意义就必须满足的，所有的形而上学问题和回答与逻辑和科学思维是不可调和的。问题的根子在于形而上学给自己确立了一个不可能完成的任务，即是要发现一种超越于经验的知识。然而，如果某种东西在可能有的经验之外，它就既不能说，也不能想，还不能问。所以，根据逻辑实证主义者的观点，形而上学虽然有事宜的有点和情感价值，但对知识无所贡献。如果哲学想要成为知识的一个真正的分支，它必须使自己从形而上学中解脱出来。维也纳小组的立场自身也受到了批判，这部分是因为它对两类有意义命题的划分并非详尽无遗。此外，它的批评忽略了对各式各样的形而上学论证作细致分析，而其中有一些其实从哪一方面看都是有意义的。 清除形而上学也是海德格尔和德里达著作中的主题，但两位作者已经发现，从其工作中排除形而上学的连续努力业已失败。 “……逻辑分析产生了否定性的结果：在这个领域里所谓的陈述完全是无意义的。因此取得了对形而上学的彻底清除，从早期反形而上学的标准出发，这是不可能的。” ——卡尔纳普：《通过语言的逻辑分析清除形而上学》，载于艾耶尔编：《逻辑实证主义》，1959年，第61页。 英语 elimination of metaphysics： Epistemology, philosophy of language,metaphysics Aslogan of logicalpositivism, representing the culminationof the anti-metaphysical tradition in the history of Western philosophy. Hume wanted to burn all books whose contents cannot bechecked by our experience or by abstract reasoning concerning quantity ornumber. Kantcriticized traditional metaphysicson the grounds of his examination of the nature and limits of knowledge. Theattack by logical positivism, on the other hand, was based on a theory oflanguage that was partly inherited from Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. Logical positivists claim that there are only two kindsof meaningful propositions: formal propositions, which are logical and mathematicalprinciples, and factual propositions, which are empirically verifiable.Metaphysical propositions, which are about such things as the absolute, essences,transcendententities, and fate, are literally nonsensical or meaningless, because they contain pseudo-words or because theyare pseudostatements, with an arrangement of words violating the rules of logical syntax, and lack any criteria of application. Thus, metaphysicsbreaks the rules that any utterance must satisfy if it is to be literallysignificant. All metaphysical questions and answers are irreconcilable withlogic and scientific thinking. The root of the problem is that metaphysicsestablishes an impossible task for itself, that is, to discover a kind ofknowledge that is beyond experience. Yet if something is beyond any possibleexperience, it could be neither said nor thought nor asked. Hence, according tological positivists, metaphysics, though it has poetic merit and emotionalvalue, does not contribute to knowledge. If philosophy wants to be a genuinebranch of knowledge, it must emancipate itself from metaphysics. This positionof the ViennaCircle isitself criticized, in part because its division between two kinds of meaningfulpropositions is not exhaustive. Furthermore, its attack ignores the detailedanalysis of various metaphysical arguments, some of which have every appearanceof being meaningful. The elimination of metaphysics is a major theme in thework of Heideggerand Derrida, but these authors have found their successiveattempts to exclude metaphysics from their work to have failed. “Logicalanalysis yields the negative result that the alleged statements in this domainare entirely meaningless. Therewith a radical elimination of metaphysics isattained, which was not yet possible from the earlier anti-metaphysicalstandpoints.” —— Carnap, “The Elimination of MetaphysicsThrough Logical Analysis of Language,” in Ayer(ed.), LogicalPositivism
中国文艺媒体联盟 | 艺窝疯 核心成员 ▼【每日哲学辞典】经验 |
|
|
来自： The_Creator > 《哲思学意——每日哲学辞典》
