Quine, “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”

 

I.                  Analytic/Synthetic Distinction

 

P1:  We have no explicit understanding of analyticity.

1a:  This would require an explicit understanding of synonymy.

 

                   1b:  We have no explicit understanding of synonymy

 

 

P2:  We have no implicit understanding of analyticity.

2a:  Q does not know whether “All green things are extended” is analytic.

 

          2b:  Semantic rules cannot help.

 

C:  The analytic/synthetic distinction is untenable.

 

 

 

II.               Reductionism

 

P1:  Reductionism requires being able to translate all meaningful claims into claims about immediate experience.

 

P2:  No such translation can be successful.

2a: Such a translation is possible only if empirical evidence can force us to give up individual claims.

 

2b:  We can hold onto any claim in the face of apparent counter-evidence by making adjustments elsewhere in our system of beliefs.

 

C:  Reductionism is untenable.