In order to understand the Verification Principle, one must first become familiar with Logical Positivism. Logical Positivism is a school of philosophy that combines empiricism, the idea that observational evidence is indispensable for knowledge of the world, with a version of rationalism incorporating mathematical and logico-linguistic constructs and deductions in epistemology, the study of knowledge (Wikipedia). The Verification Principle as A.J. Ayer states, is a statement is cognitively meaningful if and only if it is either analytic or in principle empirically verifiable. Cognitively meaningful is defined as either true or false. Analytic is defined as either mathematical or logical, and empirically verifiable is defined as the statement can be proven true or false on the basis of experience. So, a verificationist is someone who adheres to the verification principle proposed by A.J. Ayer in Language, Truth and Logic (1936). LIFE AFTER DEATH?? WHAT IMPLICATIONS DOES VERIFICATION PRINCIPLE HAVE, IF TRUE, FOR ETHICS? If the verification Principle is true it has ma...
hat for a belief to be true knowledge, it must be supported by evidence. Evidentialism also claims
Beliefs are imprinted in our consciousness that alters our perceptions, attitudes and how we react towards situations and moments of decisions, they perceive our realities. Everyone has a different imprints and perceive their beliefs from their personal experiences. Beliefs dictate how we react to life. Our beliefs can be altered and changed throughout the course of our lifetime
argues that a statement is true if it goes along with reality. An example of such is that the table is
In addition to logical consistency, testability is an important piece when evaluating a theory. According to Akers & Sellers (2013), “a theory must be testable by objective, repeatable evidence” (p.5); thus, if the theory is not testable then it has no scientific value. There are several reasons why a theory might not be testable; such as its concepts may not be observable or reportable events and tautology. Tautology refers to a statement or hypothesis that is tr...
If I say, for example, 'Up there on the cupboard there is a book', how do I set about verifying it? Is it sufficient if I glance at it, or if I look at it from different sides, or if I take it into my hands, touch it, open it, turn its leaves, and so forth? There are two conceptions here. One of them says that however I set about it, I shall never be able to verify the proposition completely. A proposition always keeps a back door open, as it were.
Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it claims to measure. It is essential for a test to be valid in order for the results to be accurately applied and interpreted. Validity isn’t determined by a single statistic, but by a body of research that demonstrates the relationship between the test and the behavior it has set out to measure.
Ethical relativism states that moral values vary between different cultures and societies. It "A Defense of Ethical Relativism” written by Ruth Benedict, an anthropologist, strived to explain and explore various examples that supported the eligibility of Moral relativism. This paper asked questions such as what is normal and abnormal? How is culture and morals related? When something is considered as normal, does it subsequently also mean that it’s moral?
Descartes brings up an interesting idea and methodology, and specifically the idea that we should take everything that we believe is true, and be skeptical of it, thus in doing so we find one undeniable truth and build upon the truth to reinforce our other beliefs. During the process of skepticism, if any doubt arises to the mind of whatever you believe in, you deem the entire belief as false. When finding the foundational truth, it must be undeniably true. This method of finding an undeniable truth is necessary, because this would allow all other philosophers to be on the same page and able to agree, thus being able to build knowledge around one central and undeniable truth to establish a belief.
In this paper, I offer a solution to the Gettier problem by adding a fourth condition to the justified true belief analysis of knowledge. First though, a brief review. Traditionally, knowledge had been accounted for with the justified true belief analysis. To know something, three conditions had to be met: first, you had to have a belief; second, the belief had to be justified; third, this justified belief had to be true. So a justified true belief counts as knowledge. Gettier however showed this analysis to be inadequate as one can have a justified true belief that no one would want to count as knowledge.
that the meaning of the words prove this or they can be proved by some
Being a mathematician, Descartes felt convinced that he could deduce all truth from a single fundamental principle. As the instrument of his search for truth he used a universal methodic doubt. His own words will best reveal his line of thought.
The positivist position which claims to be the natural of science and prefer working in social reality hence, the testing of hypothesis developed from any existing theory through the measurement of observable realities Paul Flowers (2009). The positivism approach is based upon values of reason, the truth that is revealed purely on the facts that is gathered through the direct observation and experience which is measured empirically using quantitative methods; statistical analysis, surveys and experience. According to Sundar (2003) this research philosophy has an important role of an objective analyst be able to evaluate the collected data that will produce appropriate effective results.
In the conclusion of Charles Taylor’s “The Ethics of Authenticity,” Taylor addresses how modern individuals need to rediscover what is most important and valuable. The culture of individualism and authenticity is ingrained in our modern language and society. And while individuals may believe that individualism is the cause of the three malaises, they must acknowledge that individualism points to authenticity. Individualism is about a common humanity, and that the value of individualism is greater than just ourselves.
Requiring testability weeds out theories we cannot prove true or false, such as tautologies, or those proposing causes that are not measurable by observable or reportable events.
“The end justifies the means” is the famous quote of Machiavelli (Viroli, 1998) which puts the emphasis of morality on the finale results rather than the actions undertaken to achieve them. Is this claim true in the field of the natural sciences? Whether atomic bombings, as a mean used to end World War II, justifies the death of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What is moral limitation in the acquisition of knowledge in the natural sciences? How is art constrained by moral judgment? Is it applicable to various works of art? Oscar Wilde claimed that “There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.” (Wilde, 1945). Does it mean that writers should have complete freedom? Or should ethical considerations limit what they say and how they say it?