逻辑学家_艾耶尔逻辑学观点述评

  本文关键词：艾耶尔逻辑学观点述评，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。

艾耶尔逻辑学观点述评

艾耶尔逻辑学观点述评

本文主要说明了艾耶尔在逻辑实证主义论方面的一些观点和对真理和或然性的一些观点。以及奎因、克里普克对他的两个教条的评判。作为维也纳学派的重要代表人物,艾耶尔主要受到了石里克和卡尔纳普的影响。尤其是在可证实性原则和对于综合命题和浅析浅析命题的两个区分上。艾耶尔的逻辑实证主义观点中,对于综合命题和浅析浅析命题的区分开始对艾耶尔的逻辑学观点的探讨。综合命题和浅析浅析命题的区分也是艾耶尔逻辑实证论的一个基石。在接下来的观点中着重于对于可证实性原则的强弱意 义的研究,认为如果一个命题在经验之中得到证实,那么就说这个命题的强意 义上是可证实的。如果在经验之上是这个命题成为或然得到,那就说这个命题在弱意 义上是可证实的。阐述了确实的证实与部分的证实之间的区别,并且说明了为什么没有任何命题能够被确实的证实和确实的否定。以及一个命题是否在事实上有意 义,如果一个命题当且仅当它表达可被经验确定的否定某个东西的时候,才被承认为事实上有意 义的。艾耶尔还对可证实的做了区分,分为：(一)、实际的可证实性和原则的可证实性之间的区分。(二)、强可证实性和弱可证实性之间的区分。艾耶尔还考察了波普尔的证伪的原则。艾耶尔不同意把证伪原则作为考察意 义的真假的标准。讨论真理与必定性时候主要阐述了真理的有效的标准,然后从经验命题和假设命题等方面讨论了真理。艾耶尔认为经验的命题的效准不是纯粹形式的。我们说一个经验命题或者一个经验命题的系统是假的,是因为不能满足某种实质的标准,而不是在形式上有什么缺点。假设命题的真实地标准是从它们与用实物所表示的命题的关系之中得到的。除了纯粹用实物表示的命题之外,没有一个综合命题能在逻辑上不容怀疑,我们并不认为任何综合命题都可能纯粹用实物来表示。并且讨论了必定性和或然性。认为如果一个与命题相关的观察符合我们的期望,那么这个命题的真实性就会被肯定。但是不会说那个命题已经被证明是绝对的有效,因为将来有一个观察来否定这个命题的可能性也是存在的。但是我们可以说,这个命题的或然性被增加了。一个命题的或然性既取决于我们的观察的性质,也取决于我们合理性的概念。在此之后,讲述了奎因和克里普克对于艾耶尔的两个教条的评判,也就是浅析浅析命题和综合命题之分,以及证实原则进行评论。奎因指出关于浅析浅析命题和综合命题区分理论是现代经验论者的一个非经验的教条。他首先把一般浅析浅析分为两类：第一类是逻辑真理,第二类是浅析浅析陈述,奎因对第二类浅析浅析陈述考察了“浅析浅析性”概念,这里要依赖一个和浅析浅析自身同样需要解释的“同义性”概念。怎样去解释这个概念,奎因得到了三个答案：(一)、定义不是同义性的根据。(二)、保全真值的互相替换性不是同义性的充分条件。(三)、定义和保全真值得互相替换性都不能说明同义性,所以不能作为浅析浅析性的根据。克里普克是另外一个对艾耶尔的这两个教条评判的比较典型的哲学家。他强调要严格区别先天命题和必定命题。主要表明了奎因在两个教条方面对于艾耶尔的不同观点的评判。总而言之就是在以上这几个方面对艾耶尔的逻辑学观点进行了阐述和浅析浅析。

【Abstract】 This paper describes Ayer’s view on sources of logic positivism and the perspective of the truth and probability, and Quine and Kripke’s judgement of about Ayer’s two doctrines.As an important representative of the Vienna School,Ayer mainly was impacted by Schlick and Carnap, especially verifiability principle and the distinction between synthesis proposition and analysis proposition.In Ayer’s view of logical positivism, the distinction between synthesis proposition and analysis proposition started from the discussion on the Ayer’s view of logic. Comprehensive analysis of proposition and the distinction between propositions of logical positivism is a cornerstone for Ayer. In the next point in focusing on the strength of the verifiability principle of meaning, that if a proposition was confirmed in the experiences, then say that a proposition is demonstrable strong sense. If this proposition is based on the experience obtained a probability, it said that in the weak sense of this proposition is verifiable.Described with some concrete confirmation confirmed the distinction between, and explains why there is no proposition can be confirmed, and indeed negative. And a proposition is meaningful in fact, If a proposition if and only if it is determined the expression of the experience can be something negative, when before she was recognized as a matter of fact meaningful.Ayer also made a distinction between verifiable,1,the actual principles of verifiability and the distinction between verifiability.2,the distinction between strong verifiability and weak verifiability. Ayer also inspected the Popper’s falsification principle. Ayer has not agreed to the principle of falsification as the meaning of true and false inspection standards.When I discussed the truth and necessity, I mainly expounded the standard of truth validity. And then I discussed the truth in terms of empirical propositions and assumptions proposition. In Ayer’s opinion, the standard of experience proposition is not purely form. We say that an empirical proposition, or a system of empirical propositions is false, because the substance does not meet certain standards, rather than any shortcomings in form.Suppose the proposition is true to the standard and in kind from their proposition expressed by the relationship among received. In addition to the proposition that purely physical,there is no a comprehensive proposition to the logical no doubt, we do not believe that any synthetic proposition may be expressed in purely physical.And we discussed the necessity and probability. If an observation which was associated with the proposition consistent with our expectations, then the truth of this proposition will be affirmed. But that proposition does not say has been proved to be totally effective, because there is a future observation to negate the possibility of this proposition also exist. But we can say that this proposition probability was increased.Probability of a proposition not only depends on the nature of our observations, but also depends on our concept of rationality.Then it gave account of the Quine and Kripke’s view about Ayer’s two doctrines.Namely, it distinguished between the analysis proposition and synthesis proposition and comment on confirm principle. Quine pointed out that the proposition on the analysis of propositions and comprehensive theory of the modern distinction between the experience of those who experience a non-dogmatic.He first the general analysis is divided into two categories: The first is the logic of truth, the second category of statements, Quine on the second category of statements examined "analysis" of the concept here of their own to rely on one and the same need to explain the "synonymy" concept.How to explain this concept, Quine got three answers:1,according to the definition is not synonymous in nature.2,the preservation of the true value of each substitution is not a sufficient condition for synonymy.3,the definition and preservation of the true worth can not explain another substitution synonymous,it is not as analytical basis.Kripke is also an Ayer evaluation of these two typical dogmatic philosophers.He stressed the need to strictly distinguish a priori propositions and the inevitable proposition.And it showed the Quine’s judgement on the two doctrines which was different from the view of Ayer.In short, I described and analyzed the Ayer’s view on logic in all above aspects.

更多论文推荐: 各专业论文 海量论文下载

  本文关键词：艾耶尔逻辑学观点述评，由笔耕文化传播整理发布。