Advertisement

Quine’s Empiricist Justificatory Monism

Chapter
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

In this chapter, I show how Quine’s empiricist justificatory monism, his claim that the only fundamental way to verify any claim is through empirical evidence, is based on his verification holism, which in turn presupposes his holophrastic conception of empirical data. I then point out that the problems outlined in my discussion of Quine’s naturalized epistemology threaten to undermine his empiricist justificatory monism. Finally, I argue that Quine’s explication of empirical-scientific justification itself cannot be justified in the sense that it itself specifies. Given justificatory monism, this means that the explication is unjustified.

Keywords

Empiricist justificatory monism Verification holism Empirical data Carnap, Rudolf Quine, W.V.O Underdetermination Naturalism 

References

  1. Carnap, Rudolf. 1937. Testability and Meaning—Continued. Philosophy of Science 4 (1): 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. ———. 1950. Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 4 (11): 20–40.Google Scholar
  3. Glock, Hans-Johann. 2003. Quine and Davidson on Language, Thought and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hylton, Peter. 2007. Quine. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Keil, Geert. 2003. “Science Itself Teaches”. A Fresh Look at Quine’s Naturalistic Metaphilosophy. Grazer Philosophische Studien 66: 253–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Quine, Willard Van Orman. 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 1969. Epistemology Naturalized. In Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, 69–90. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  8. ———. 1980 [1951]. Two Dogmas of Empiricism. In From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 20–46.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 1981a. Empirical Content. In Theories and Things, 24–30. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 1981b. Five Milestones of Empiricism. In Theories and Things, 67–72. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 1981c. On the Very Idea of a Third Dogma. In Theories and Things, 38–42. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. ———. 1992. Pursuit of Truth, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. ———. 1995. From Stimulus to Science. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 2008 [1975]. The Nature of Natural Knowledge. In Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist, 257–270. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Richardson, Alan. 1997. Two Dogmas About Logical Empiricism: Carnap and Quine on Logic, Epistemology, and Empiricism. Philosophical Topics 25 (2): 145–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sinclair, Nathan. 2012. A Dogma of Naturalism. Metaphilosophy 43 (5): 551–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. van Fraassen, Bas. 2002. The Empirical Stance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Verhaegh, Sander. 2014. Quine’s Argument from Despair. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (1): 150–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ———. 2015. Rafts, Boats, and Cruise Ships. Naturalism and Holism in Quine’s Philosophy. PhD thesis, University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  20. Weir, Alan. 2014. Quine’s Naturalism. In A Companion to W.V.O. Quine, ed. Gilbert Harman and Ernie Lepore, 114–147. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations