Back to "Primary Study: Informal Paraphrase"
Back to H.F. Philosophy contents
[*] Logical positivists may object that
the assertion that there is language is and should be analytic (or
meaningless). But this objection cannot be sustained. The attempt to find a
criterion which will exclude some grammatical English sentences as meaningless
(or analytic) without excluding too many, and without being arbitrary, has
always failed. Indeed, is it not so, that one brings out the concepts of
"analytic" and "meaningless" arbitrarily, to cover up embarrassing problems?
Existence claims, that is, descriptive assertions of the form `There is
________', are unavoidable in cognition. And it is not plausible that any
grammatical natural-language statement is true independently of all
experiential or contingent considerations. Nor can an arbitrary,
unsubstantiated condemnation of some grammatical statements in the natural
language as meaningless be respected. And a retreat to artificial languages
cannot evade the questions at issue above.