Why Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy

Guillermo E. Rosado Haddock
University of Puerto Rico at Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico | gerosadohaddock@gmail.com

Received: 17-May-2019 | Accepted: 1-July-2019 | Published: 6-July-2019
Disputatio [Dec. 2019], Vol. 8, No. 11, pp. 61-98 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3438765
Article | [EN] | Full Text | Statistics | Copyright Notice [sp] | Vol. 8 No. 11

How to cite this article:
Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2019). «Why Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy». Disputatio. Philosophical Research Bulletin 8, no. 11: pp. 61–98.


Abstract | So-called analytic philosophy is a product of early XXth century philosophy, resulting both as a response to the revolutions in logic, physics and mathematics of that period, as well as a reaction to the uncontrolled metaphysical systems that flourished in most of the XIXth century. But so-called analytic philosophy was from the very beginning biased by an ideological empiricism that blinded the understanding both of the history of philosophy, as well as that of physics and mathematics. Their grotesque division of philosophy in analytic and continental philosophy served only the purpose of arbitrarily excluding important contributions to rigorous philosophy not based on the gigantic meta-theoretic dogma of empiricism. Unorthodox analytic philosophy, on the contrary, though by no means ignoring the results of the physical sciences, is not based on any empiricist dogma, being perfectly conscious of the difficulties of empiricism to understand both physical and deductive sciences. Some of those difficulties of the empiricist ideology, both of general epistemological nature, and more specifically in the assessment of physical science and very especially in its misguided attempts to deal with the deductive sciences, will be examined.
Keywords |
Post-Kantian Science and Philosophy · Ideological Empiricism · Quinean Myths · Husserl on Theoretical Physics and Mathematical Intuition · Empiricist Distortions of the History of Philosophy.

Por una filosofía analítica inortodoxa

Resumen | La llamada filosofía analítica es un producto de comienzos del siglo XX, como resultado tanto de una respuesta a las revoluciones en lógica, física y matemáticas de ese período como de una reacción a los sistemas metafísicos descontrolados que florecieron en la mayor parte del siglo XIX. Pero la llamada filosofía analítica estaba desde su mismo comienzo comprometida con un empirismo ideológico que cegaba la comprensión tanto de la historia de la filosofía como de la física y la matemática. Su grotesca división de la filosofía en analítica y continental sólo sirvió al propósito de excluir arbitrariamente importantes contribuciones a la filosofía rigurosa que no estaban basadas en el gigantesco dogma meta-teórico del empirismo. La filosofía analítica no-ortodoxa, por el contrario, aunque en modo alguno ignora los resultados de las ciencias físicas, no está basada en ningún dogma empirista, pues tiene perfecta conciencia de las dificultades del empirismo para entender tanto las ciencias físicas como las deductivas. Algunas de esas dificultades de la ideología empirista, tanto de naturaleza epistemológica general, como más específicamente de su avalúo de la ciencia física y muy especialmente de sus descarriados intentos de comprender las ciencias deductivas, serán aquí examinados
Palabras Clave | Ciencia y filosofía post-kantiana · Empirismo ideológico · Mitos Quineanos · Husserl acerca de teorías físicas e intuición matemática · Distorsiones empiristas de la historia de la filosofía.


References

Abbott, Stephen (2001). Understanding Analysis. New York et al.: Springer

Auyang, Sunny Y. (1995). How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Beth, Evert. W. (1965). The Foundations of Mathematics, revised edition. Amsterdam: North Holland

Bolzano, Bernard (1978). Grundlegung der Logik, selected sections from volumes 1 and 2 of his Wissenschaftslehre. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1963

Carnap, Rudolf (1922). Der Raum, Kant-Studien (Ergänzungsheft 56). reprint, Vaduz: Topos Verlag 1991

Carnap, Rudolf (1928). Der logische Aufbau der Welt. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1974

Carnap, Rudolf (1932). „Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache“. In Scheinprobleme in der Philosophie und andere metaphysikkritische Aufsätze. edited by Thomas Mormann?, pp. 81-109. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 2004

Carnap, Rudolf (1934). Logische Syntax der Sprache, enlarged English edition, The Logical Syntax of Language. London: Routledge 1937

Carnap, Rudolf (2018). “A Letter of Rudolf Carnap to Jonas Cohn from 26 September 1925’. In Husserl and Analytic Philosophy, edited by Guillermo E. Rosado Haddock, pp. 321-322. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

Cederberg, Judith N. (2001). A Course in Modern Geometries. New York et al.: Springer

Chang, C.C.  & Keisler, H. Jerome (1973). Model Theory. Amsterdam: North Holland, third edition 1990

Church, Alonzo (1944). “Review of M. Farber, The Foundation of Phenomenology”, Journal of Symbolic Logic 9, pp. 63-65

Duhem, Pierre (1894) “Some Reflections on the Subject of Experimental Physics”. reprinted in the English translation of his papers Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science, edited by Roger Ariew and Peter Baker  pp. 75-111. Indianapolis: Hackett

Duhem, Pierre (1914). La Théorie Physique: son Objet, sa Structure. English Translation, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press 1955

Duhem, Pierre (1996). Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science edited by Roger Ariew and Peter Baker, Indianapolis

Dummett, Michael (1974). Frege: Philosophy of Language. London: Duckworth

Føllesdal, Dagfinn (1964). Husserl und Frege, ein Beitrag zur Beleuchtung der phänomenologischen Philosophie. translation in Mind, Meaning and Mathematics, edited by L. Haaparanta, pp. 3-47. Dordrecht: Reidel 1994

Frege, Gottlob (1879). Begriffsschrift. Reprint Hildesheim: Georg Olms 1964

Frege, Gottlob (1893-1903). Grundgesetze der Arithmetik I, II. reprinted in a single volume, Hildesheim: Georg Olms 1962

Frege, Gottlob (1891). „Funktion und Begriff“. reprint in his Kleine Schriften, pp. 125-142

Frege, Gottlob (1918). „Der Gedanke“, reprint in his Kleine Schriften, pp. 342-362

Frege, Gottlob (1967). Kleine Schriften, edited by Ignacio Angelleli, revised edition 1990. Hildesheim: Georg Olms

Frege, Gottlob (1969). Nachgelassene Schriften, revised edition, Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1983

Frege, Gottlob (1969). „Logik“, in Nachgelassene Schriften, pp. 137-163

Frege, Gottlob (1969, 1983) „Über Euklidische Geometrie“, in Nachgelassene Schriften, pp. 182-184

Frege, Gottlob (1976). Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel. Hamburg: Felix Meiner

Frege, Gottlob (1976). „Brief an Husserl vom 24ten Mai 1891“, in Wissenschatlicher Briefwechsel, pp. 94-98

Friedman, Michael (1999). Reconsidering Logical Positivism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Greenberg, Marvin (1980). Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometries: Development and History, second edition> San Francisco: W. H. Freeman

Greimann, Dirk (ed.) (2007). Essays on Frege’s Conception of Truth. Amsterdam: Rodopi

Haller, Rudolf and Stadler, Friedrich (eds.) (1993). Wien-Berlin-Prag: Der Aufstieg der wissenschaftlichen Philosophie. Vienna: Verlag Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky

Hegel, Georg W. F. (1812 & 1813). Wissenschaft der Logik I & II, reprint: Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1967 & 1969

Hodges, Wilfrid (1983) “Elementary Logic”, in Handbook of Philosophical Logic I, edited by D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner, pp. 1-131, Dordrecht: Kluwer

Hodges, Wilfrid (1993). Model Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Hodges, Wilfrid (1997). A Shorter Model Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Husserl, Edmund (1891, 1970). Philosophie der Arithmetik 1891, Hua XII. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff

Husserl, Edmund (1970). „Zur Logik der Zeichen: Semiotik“, Appendix B.1 of Philosophie der Arithmetik, Hua XII, pp. 340-373

Husserl, Edmund (1891). „Besprechung von E. Schröders Vorlesungen über die Algebra der Logik I“1891, reprinted in Aufsätze und Rezensionen (1890-1910), Hua XXII, pp. 3-43

Husserl, Edmund (1900-1901). Logische Untersuchungen, Hua XVIII & XIX (1/2). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, Den Haag 1975 & 1984

Husserl, Edmund (1913). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und einen phänomenologischen Philosophie I, Hua III, revised edition, Den Haag: M. Nijhoff 1976

Husserl, Edmund (1929). Formale und transzendentale Logik, Hua XVII. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff 1974

Husserl, Edmund (1939). Erfahrung und Urteil, sixth edition, Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1985

Husserl, Edmund (1956). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und einen phänomenologischen Philosophie II, Hua III, 2. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff

Husserl, Edmund (1979). Aufsätze und Rezensionen (1890-1910), Hua XXII. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff, Den Haag

Husserl, Edmund (1983). Studien zur Arithmetik und Geometrie, Hua XXI. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff,

Husserl, Edmund (1984). Einleitung in die Logik und Erkenntnistheorie, Hua XXIV. Den Haag: M. Nijhoff

Husserl, Edmund (1994). Briefwechsel (10 vols.). Dordrecht: Kluwer

Husserl, Edmund (1996). Logik und allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie. Dordrecht: Kluwer

Kant, Immanuel (1781) Kritik der reinen Vernunft, revised edition 1787, reprint of both editions. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1990

Kant, Immanuel (1783). Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschft wird auftreten können, reprint. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 2001

Kant, Immanuel (1786) Metaphysische Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft, reprint. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 1997

Klein, Felix (1974) Le Programme d’Erlangen: Considérations Comparatives sur le Recherches Géométriques Modernes. Paris: Gauthier-Villars

Kuhn, Thomas (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, expanded second edition 1970, Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Macbeth, Danielle (2007) “Striving for Truth in the Practice of Mathematics”, in Essays on Frege’s Conception of Truth, edited by Dirk Greimann, pp. 65-92

Mach, Ernst (1905). Erkenntnis und Irrtum: Skizzen zur Psychologie der Forschung, third edition 1917, reprint, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft 1980

Mayer, Verena (1991) „Die Konstruktion der Erfahrungswelt: Carnap und Husserl“, in Erkenntnis Orientated, edited by W. Spohn, pp. 287-303. Dordrecht: Kluwer

Mayer, Verena (1992) „Carnap und Husserl“, in Wissenschaft und Subjektivität, edited by D. Bell and W. Vossenkuhl, pp. 181-205. Berlin: Akademie Verlag

Mayer, Verena (2016). „Der Logische Aufbau al Plagiat”, in Husserl and Analytic Philosophy, edited by Guillermo E. Rosado Haddock, pp. 175-260

Mendelson, Elliot (1973). Number Systems and the Foundations of Analysis, reprint, Mineola, New York: Dover 2008

Popper, Karl (1963). Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge

Przelecki, Marian (1969). The Logic of Empirical Theories. London: Routledge

Putnam, Hilary (1980, 1983). “Models and Reality”, in Journal of Symbolic Logic 45, 1980, pp. 464-482, reprinted in P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam, Philosophy of Mathematics, edited by P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam, revised edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (1951). “On what there is” 1951, reprinted in From a Logical Point of View, pp. 1-19

Quine, Willard van Orman (1951). “Two Dogmas of Empiricism” 1951, reprinted in From a Logical Point of View, pp. 20-46

Quine, Willard van Orman (1953). From a Logical Point of View> Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press, Cambridge

Quine, Willard van Orman (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (1969). “Epistemology Naturalized”, in Ontological Relativity and other Essays, pp. 69-90

Quine, Willard van Orman (1969). Ontological Relativity and other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (1973). The Roots of Reference. La Salle, Illinois: Open Court

Quine, Willard van Orman (1981). Theories and Things. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (1995). From Stimulus to Science. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (2008). Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist and other Essays. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press

Quine, Willard van Orman (1970). “On the Reasons for Indeterminacy of Translation”, reprinted in Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist and Other Essays, pp. 209-214

Quine, Willard van Orman (1975). “On Empirically Equivalent Systems of the World”, reprinted in Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist and Other Essays, pp. 228-243

Quine, Willard van Orman (2008). “The Sensory Support of Science”, in Confessions of a Confirmed Extensionalist and Other Essays, pp. 327-337

Reichenbach, Hans (1920). Relativitätstheorie und Erkenntnis a priori. [English translation, The Theory of Relativity and a priori Knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press 1985]

Reichenbach, Hans (1928). Philosophie der Raum-Zeit Lehre. [English translation, The Philosophy of Space and Time. New York: Dover 1957]

Riemann, Bernhard (1867). „Über die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen“, third edition 1923, reprint, New York: Chelsea 1973

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2008). The Young Carnap’s Unknown Master. Aldershot: Ashgate

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2012). “On the Interpretation of the Young Carnap’s Philosophy”, in Against the Current, pp. 261-284

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2012). Against the Current. Frankfurt am Main: Ontos Verlag

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2016). “The Old Husserl and the Young Carnap”, Husserl and Analytic Philosophy, edited by Guillermo E. Rosado Haddock, pp. 167-198. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2015). “On Analytic a posteriori Statements: are they Possible?”. Logique et Analyse 229, pp. 25-33, reprinted in Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy, pp. 57-69

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2016). “The Interplay between Logic, Mathematics and Philosophy”, South-American Journal of Logic 2 (1), pp. 41-55, reprinted in Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy, pp. 13-30

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (ed.) (2016). Husserl and Analytic Philosophy. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2018). “The Fine Structure of Sense-Referent Semantics”, in Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy, pp. 31-56

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2018). “Husserl and Kant: voilà la difference”, in Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy, pp. 115-141

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2018). Unorthodox Analytic Philosophy. London: College Publications

Rosado Haddock, Guillermo E. (2019). “Husserl and Bourbaki”, forthcoming in META XI (2), December 2019

Rosenfeld, B. A. (1988). A History of Non-Euclidean Geometries. New York et al.: Springer

Russell, Bertrand & Whitehead, Alfred North (1910-1913, (1925-1927). Principia Mathematica (3 vols.) revised edition 1925-1927. Reprint of revised edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Schlick, Moritz (1917). Raum und Zeit in der gegenwärtigen Physik. [English translation of second edition, Space and Time in Contemporary Physics. New York: Dover]

Schlick, Moritz (1918). Allgemeine Erkenntnislehre. Second revised edition. 1925. [English translation. Lasalle, Illinois: Open Court 1985]

Sluga, Hans (1980). Gottlob Frege. London: Routledge

Stadler, Friedrich (1993). „Wien-Berlin-Prag. Zum Aufstieg der wissenschaftlichen Philosophie“, in Wien-Berlin-Prag: Der Aufstieg der wissenschaftlichen Philosphie, pp. 11-37

Suppe, Frederick (1989). The Semantic Conception of Theories and Scientific Realism. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press

Tappenden, Jamie (1995). “Geometry and Generality in Frege’s Philosophy of Arithmetic”, Synthese 102 (3), pp. 319-361

Tappenden, Jamie (2006). “The Riemannian Background of Frege’s Philosophy”. In José Ferreiros and Jeremy Gray (eds.), The Architecture of Modern Mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 97-132

Weiner, Joan (1990). Frege in Perspective. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press

Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1921). Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung. [English translation, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 1922. Bilingual edition. London: Routledge 1961].


© The author(s) 2019. This work, published by Disputatio [www.disputatio.eu], is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License [BY–NC–ND]. The copy, distribution and public communication of this work will be according to the copyright notice. For inquiries and permissions, please email: boletin@disputatio.eu.