AYER'S LOGICAL POSITIVISM & VERIFICATION

What is logical positivism?

A philosophical position that determines statements as meaningful if they are analytic or can be empirically tested

What are analytic statements?

Statements where reason can tell us if they are true or false

What are synthetic statements?

Statements where observation of the physical world can tell us if they are true or false

What is verification principle?

A principle that asserts synthetic statements meaningless with no physical evidence to verify

Ayer argues…

while we may not have to undergo the testing, we do need to know what kind of test can be completed to discover a statement true or false

This implies…

religious claims should be considered meaningless e.g ‘the Lord is my Shepherd’ cannot be determined true or false through senses

What are criticisms of the verification principle?

• Principle cannot be verified

• Some scientific claims can’t be verified

• Only statements about present can be verified

• Ethical claims can’t be verified

What is the verification principle itself can’t be verified criticism?

Verification principle can’t be verified through sense experience as meaning cannot be determined by use of one’s senses, principle not a meaningful synthetic statement & if analytic, provides an alternative definition of ‘meaningful’, theory fails its own test so unsuccessful

What is the some scientific claims can’t be verified criticism?

Although logical positivists wanted to highlight all religious claims as meaningless while maintaining scientific ones as meaningful, some e.g black holes can’t be verified through senses,

What is the only statements about the present can be verified criticism?

Historical claims about past can’t be verified through senses, can only use historical sources which can be unreliable, yet historical claims still regarded meaningful, but are unsuccessful when undergoing verification principle

What is the ethical claims can’t be verified criticism?

Ethical statement e.g ‘murder is wrong’ cannot be tested empirically, Ayer claims ethical statements merely expression of emotion rather than moral facts, means they should hold no value in justice system etc

But what does John Hick assert about religious claims?

They are ‘eschatologically verifiable’ because God’s existence will be proven in afterlife

What problem did logical positivists recognise?

Determining too many things as meaningless

Why does Ayer thus modify the verification principle?

To allow for more than merely immediate verification using sense experience

What does he distinguish between?

• Verification in practice vs verification in principle

• Strong vs weak verification

What is verification in practice?

Whether it is practically possible to falsify a claim e.g can test temp of a room using thermometer

What is verification in principle?

Knowing what one must do to falsify a statement but may not be practically possible to complete

What does this allow for?

Universal scientific claims to be meaningful

What is strong verification?

Concluding whether a statement is true or false through the senses

What is weak verification?

Empirical evidence suggests it is probable for statement to be true, but cannot conclusively be determined

What does this allow for?

Historical statements to be regarded as meaningful