Idle question

[davv]

Would you say that

"logical positivism is the metaphysical position that one doesn't need a metaphysical position"

is reasonably accurate? Or is it just something that sounds neat but isn't?

Comments

[lhexa]

It's pithy, but I think it's better to think of logical positivism as a type of criticism (based on showing opponents' arguments to be devoid of meaning) instead of a theory on its own.

[premchaia_pre4]

I am tempted to give it to Percival Smaug Llewellyn and see what he thinks. “Will ſay things that ſeem to make ſenſe until you think about them for food.”

[davv]

And many counters to it argue that when considered a theory of its own, it overreaches, so there is indeed something to what you say.

Verificationism is classically too strict (it contradicts itself), for instance; and that's part of what I wanted to suggest with the sentence. A metaphysical position that you don't need a metaphysical position is, after all, also a metaphysical position :)