Talk:Rudolf Carnap
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] Einstein
I did not known that Einstein was a teacher of Carnap. Can anyone give me a reference? Thanks. [[Murzim 12:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)]]
I never read anywhere that Einstein was a "teacher" of Carnap except in the sense that he was an influence. Carnap replied to Hempel's attack on the analytic-synthetic distinction both in Schilpp’s Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist (1949) containing Hempel's critique and in the concluding two chapters of his Philosophical Foundations of Physics (1963) where Carnap references Einstein's Sidelights on Relativity (1921; English, 1923), in which Einstein says that the theorems of mathematics are certain in so far as they are not about reality, and that in so far as they are about reality they are uncertain. Carnap maintained that the analytic-synthetic distinction is of supreme importance for philosophy of science. Carnap believed that Einstein's theory of relativity could not have been developed had Einstein not recognized the sharp dividing line between pure mathematics, in which there are many logically consistent geometries, and physics, in which only experiment and observation can determine which of these mathematical geometries can be applied most usefully to the physical world. This reply made late in Carnap’s career reveals how influential Einstein’s development of relativity theory was on Carnap’s philosophical thinking. See my History of Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Science, BOOK III: Carnap - with free downloads with permission for nonprofit use. Thickey3 14:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Thomas J. Hickey
[edit] His views on religion
I don't think that the Category: American atheists, and metaphysicians are good to determine his views. I think that he wasn't an atheist, because he said, that the word God has lost its meaning when people transfer it to a metaphysical conception. He called metaphysical terms "meaningless". But I think that he was atheist toward the Greek gods or others. We can't deny a meaningless term.
"Carnap was an atheist" http://www.csicop.org/si/9803/gardner.html According to his friend and former student, he was.
[edit] Esperanto
Is the esperanto tidbit really relevant? There's nothing else that trivial on the page. I wonder if the esperanto people have been by...141.140.153.84 02:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
