Skip to main content

Definitions, Conventions and Empirical Judgments

  • Chapter
General Theory of Knowledge

Part of the book series: LEP Library of Exact Philosophy ((LEP,volume 11))

  • 203 Accesses

Abstract

Every judgment we make is either definitional or cognitive. This distinction, as we noted above (§ 8), has only a relative significance in the conceptual or “ideal” sciences. It emerges all the more sharply, however, in the empirical or “real” sciences. In these sciences it has a fundamental importance; and a prime task of epistemology is to make use of this distinction in order to clarify the kinds of validity possessed by various judgments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. An example is E. Dürr (Erkenntnistheorie, p. 81), who rejects the distinction in question “because one and the same judgment can often be made in two ways: the subject concept may be thought of as containing the predicate concept or it may be thought of without the predicate concept.” But anyone who thinks of the predicate concept as being contained in the subject concept is thinking of a different subject concept from the one thought of without the predicate concept. The concept is different in the two cases even if the object designated by means of it is the same. T. Ziehen also attempts to treat the logical distinction psychologically (Erkenntnistheorie, 1913, pp. 408 ff., 559 ff.).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kant puts it this way: “In an analytic judgment, the predicate goes to the concept, in a synthetic judgment it goes to the object of the concept, because the predicate is not contained in the concept.”

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1974 Springer-Verlag/Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schlick, M. (1974). Definitions, Conventions and Empirical Judgments. In: General Theory of Knowledge. LEP Library of Exact Philosophy, vol 11. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-3099-5_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-3099-5_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-3101-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-3099-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics