Interim Period: Carnap Versus Popper

Joseph Agassi*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review


The “Vienna Circle” worded young Wittgenstein’s philosophy as the identification of language with the language of science. He had claimed to have solved the problem of induction. They had to respond to Popper’s new solution to it. They took his solution to be in the framework of Wittgenstein’s identification of language with the language of science, although Popper rejected it, as he followed the traditional view of the negation of a scientific theory as unscientific: this is a denial that science is closed under negation (as a language should be). Carnap and Hempel managed to ignore this fact. They then found it easy to prove Popper’s theory of science is inconsistent.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationSynthese Library
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media B.V.
Number of pages20
StatePublished - 2018

Publication series

NameSynthese Library
ISSN (Print)0166-6991
ISSN (Electronic)2542-8292


Dive into the research topics of 'Interim Period: Carnap Versus Popper'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this