Another cite seems to be:
Otto Neurath and the Unity of Science - Page 71 - Google Books Result
books.google.com/books?isbn=9400701438
His attempts to convince Carnap or the mathematician Hans Hahn on the value ... Aristotelian metaphysics, “certain differences” between him and Carnap were ...
And so on!
Posts
There seem to me lots of issues with the page there that I read. So often people writing about Carnap attribute to him view that don't seem to me correct.
ReplyDeleteFor example here, talk about Carnap not accepting the meta-language "point of view" till late, when we know that it was an important element of his inspiration for Logical Syntax which occurred at the time of Godel's incompleteness result, 1931.
But it does look like we find Carnap taking Aristotelian metaphysics at face value (i.e. as metaphysics in his own sense) whereas I am frequently arguing that things which typically are called metaphysics don't actually qualify as such relative to Carnap's conception.
There is here some gap between the conclusions I draw from Carnap's (stated) position and the conclusions he himself drew.
RBJ