Abstract

ALTHOUGH the claim that empirical verifiability is a necessary condition for the cognitive meaningfulness of contingent sentences has been rejected in many quarters, the attempt to distinguish what is empirically verifiable and consequently empirically significant has not been rejected by any means. Intuitively there seems to be an important difference between a phrase such as 'nutrino' and one such as 'immortal soul.' Whether or not we want to claim that 'There are immortal souls' is cognitively meaningless, it surely seems to be correct that it differs from 'There are nutrinos' in a significant way. The phrase 'nutrino' is an important theoretical term in the empirical science of physics, but the phrase 'immortal soul' has no significance for physics or any other empirical science. Surely, then, we ought to be able to distinguish between a phrase empirically significant relative to some science such as physics and a phrase having no such significance. We should be able 49

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.