4 ms·

Positivism. Logical positivism.

by RodericDay 12y ago

cbd1984 12y ago
> Positivism. Logical positivism. Isn't this name taken by a somewhat different philosophy?
- RodericDay 12y ago
  I don't think so. Parent asserts, > this movement appears to be a kind of hyper-empiricism informed by cognitive psychology, AI research, and Bayesian statistics. Opening intro from wiki for Logical Positivism asserts, > Logical positivism and logical empiricism, which together formed neopositivism, was a movement in Western philosophy that embraced verificationism, an approach that sought to legitimize philosophical discourse on a basis shared with the best examples of empirical sciences. Stephen Bond had a neat essay, perhaps a bit dubious on the AI/declarative side, about this exact topic. He writes a bit acerbically, but read at least past "For a long time I accepted this explanation at face value...". http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/positivism.html http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/positivism.html
  - rpedroso 12y ago
    The wikipedia definition isn't the clearest definition of logical positivism. If I had to define logical positivism in one sentence (which, in philosophy, is almost universally a bad idea), I would say something like this: Logical positivism is a philosophical movement which maintains that statements are only meaningful if they can be formally derived or empirically verified. In that respect, I think that logical positivism and the kind of empiricist approach identified by the OP have a significant amount in common. Similarly, I think the approaches share many of the same problems.
  - kbenson 12y ago
    Thanks for the link to the essay. The images are interesting, I didn't get that anything was going on until the third one. It's pretty good reading once you pick up on his humor. This passage is a gem: > The reluctant scion of a domineering steel tycoon, one of the wealthiest men in Europe, Wittgenstein spent his childhood hob-nobbing with the highest of imperial Viennese high society — and society doesn't get much higher than that. Groomed from an early age to take over his father's industrial empire, Wittgenstein instead fucked off to England at the earliest opportunity, to devote his life to the study of the most uncommercial and practically useless subject he could find. Russell proved an ideal mentor, and Predicate Logic an ideal subject.

Positivism. Logical positivism.

cbd1984 12y ago

> Positivism. Logical positivism. Isn't this name taken by a somewhat different philosophy?

RodericDay 12y ago
I don't think so. Parent asserts, > this movement appears to be a kind of hyper-empiricism informed by cognitive psychology, AI research, and Bayesian statistics. Opening intro from wiki for Logical Positivism asserts, > Logical positivism and logical empiricism, which together formed neopositivism, was a movement in Western philosophy that embraced verificationism, an approach that sought to legitimize philosophical discourse on a basis shared with the best examples of empirical sciences. Stephen Bond had a neat essay, perhaps a bit dubious on the AI/declarative side, about this exact topic. He writes a bit acerbically, but read at least past "For a long time I accepted this explanation at face value...". http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/positivism.html http://laurencetennant.com/bonds/positivism.html
- rpedroso 12y ago
  The wikipedia definition isn't the clearest definition of logical positivism. If I had to define logical positivism in one sentence (which, in philosophy, is almost universally a bad idea), I would say something like this: Logical positivism is a philosophical movement which maintains that statements are only meaningful if they can be formally derived or empirically verified. In that respect, I think that logical positivism and the kind of empiricist approach identified by the OP have a significant amount in common. Similarly, I think the approaches share many of the same problems.
- kbenson 12y ago
  Thanks for the link to the essay. The images are interesting, I didn't get that anything was going on until the third one. It's pretty good reading once you pick up on his humor. This passage is a gem: > The reluctant scion of a domineering steel tycoon, one of the wealthiest men in Europe, Wittgenstein spent his childhood hob-nobbing with the highest of imperial Viennese high society — and society doesn't get much higher than that. Groomed from an early age to take over his father's industrial empire, Wittgenstein instead fucked off to England at the earliest opportunity, to devote his life to the study of the most uncommercial and practically useless subject he could find. Russell proved an ideal mentor, and Predicate Logic an ideal subject.