> On Apr 2, 2015, at 4:27 PM, Steven Ericsson-Zenith <ste...@iase.us> wrote: > > You maline Logical Positive here with a historical confusion. Carnap > immediately pointed out to Popper, of course, falsifiable. Popper's complaint > was a noisy no-op.
Sorry, something is missing here. Could you expand a bit? I’m well aware of Carnap replying to Popper and Popper just being wrong. (Popper to me is the most overrated figure of the 20th century) I don’t think I was saying that at all. Rather I was giving some reasons why Popper was just off. It really was Quine who I think makes things more complex for Carnap. But of course the positivists have become the straw men of philosophy with people at best conflating the early Neurath or Carnap with their mature thought. They’re still wrong in my view, but wrong in much more subtle ways than is usually presented. As I said I think they took the verification principle of Peirce in incorrect directions - albeit opposite ones from which James did.
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
