Vienna Circle ~ 1925:

Vienna Circle ~ 1925:
The marriage of logic and empiricism

Unification of Science along with the expulsion
of metaphysics and ethics was their goal

Theoretical terms can be linked to observation
terms or "Protocol Sentences" through theoretical
statements of the relationships between such
observations and theoretical constructs

Verifiability principle: "The meaning of a proposition
is the method of its verification." The truth or
meaning of a statement is to be found in the
verification (proof) made by observations

Laws of Science are summary statements about
regularly correlated observations and predictions

Explanation is found in the verification of determinations
or predictions

Three groups of Logical (Neo) Positivists,
supporters of: Physicalism, Sensationism
and physical Language

Percy Bridgman (1882-1961): Operationism

1927 - The logic of modern physics

Operational analysis: "the concept is synonymous with the corresponding set of operations" needed to perform the observation (physical and mental operations)

This is not a method for definitions, but for analyzing or sharpening the meanings of concepts already in place

Phenomenalism: Knowledge is limited to an individual's observations

vs.

Operationism: S.S.Stevens (1935) & E.G.Boring (1936)

Terms must be defined operationally to be scientifically meaningful

The "'Operational definition', as practiced in psychology,
seeks to universalize the language community by
reducing a concept to an observation"

Paradox of the verifiability principle
rejecting its own foundation

Sigmund Koch (1951): Problems with
Logical Positivism and Operationism

Psychology is "in an era of total disorientation"
numerous "grand systems" with elaborate
auxiliary hypotheses using unobserved
"intervening variables" and "hypothetical constructs"

Bridgman (1954): "I feel as if I have created a Frankenstein
. . . I abhor the word operationalism or operationism"

Gilbert Ryle (1949): The concept of Mind

Rejected Descartes' "dogma of the ghost in the machine"
as well as the representational (copy) theory of knowledge

"Mind" is not an ontological category (an actual thing);
to think of "Mind" as such is to make a "Category Mistake"

Other mistakes: Confusing "Simon Fraser University"
for an object or a building and confusing "pain" with behaviour

As such it is an error to mistake the meaning of
"mental predicates" with simple behaviours; one
needs to understand the criteria of the use of terms

Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951):
Language games and traditions

Mind, pain, memory, learning, thinking & intelligence
are real, but they are not entities or things

There is not a limited set of defining or
"essential features" (list of propositions or
statements) that describe such concepts

Conceptual confusion arises from failing to recognize
our concepts as part of a loose cluster of expressions
which are characterized by a having "family resemblance"

Terminal explanations are accepted when we decide
to stop asking "why?" and stop our investigation.
We can never fully explain human action, however,
we can understand it!