Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metaphysics and the Logical Analysis of ‘Nothing’

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Significance of the Lvov-Warsaw School in the European Culture

Part of the book series: Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook ((VCIY,volume 21))

Abstract

There has always been an affinity between Twardowski’s students and the members of the Vienna Circle. Both are analytic philosophers in a broader sense of the term: convinced that philosophy can be done in a scientific way, they were interested in logic, and opposed to speculative metaphysics and irrationalism. Especially in the early thirties, the two groups came to know each other better. In 1930, Carnap came to Warsaw for several lectures. And in 1934, Ajdukiewicz, Łukasiewicz, Tarski and other members of the Lvov-Warsaw School went to the pre-conference of the first international congress on the unity of science in Prague, and met there Frank, Neurath, Carnap and Reichenbach. This contact was continued at the first congress in Paris, 1935, where scientific philosophy was the topic. None of the members of the Lvov-Warsaw School identified him- or herself with the Vienna Circle, for there are some important differences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Cf. F. Stadler, Studien zum Wiener Kreis. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp 1997, pp. 396–398.

  2. 2.

    E. Mach, Die Analyse der Empfindungen (1886). Darmstadt: Wissenschafliche Buchgesellschaft 1987.

  3. 3.

    Ibid., pp. 298, 300.

  4. 4.

    E. Husserl, Prolegomena zur reinen Logik (1900), in: E. Ströker (Ed.), Logische Untersuchungen. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 2009.

  5. 5.

    Ibid., p. 196 ff.

  6. 6.

    J. Łukasiewicz, Über den Satz des Widerspruchs bei Aristoteles (1910). Hildesheim, etc.: Georg Olms 1993.

  7. 7.

    Cf. A. Rojszczak, B. Smith, “Truthmakers, Truthbearers and the Objectivity of Truth”, in Philosophy and Logic. In search of the Polish Tradition, in: J. Hintikka et al. (Eds.), Amsterdam: Kluwer 2003, pp. 229–268; p. 252.

  8. 8.

    M. Kokoszyńska, “W sprawie walki z metafizyką” [On the Battle against Metaphysics], in: Przegląd Filozoficzny 41, 1938, pp. 9–24.

  9. 9.

    J. Woleński, Logic and Philosophy in the Lvov-Warsaw School. Dordrecht: Kluwer 1989, p. 298.

  10. 10.

    J. Woleński, “The Lvov-Warsaw School and the Vienna Circle”, in: K. Szaniawski (Ed.), The Vienna Circle and the Lvov-Warsaw School. Dordrecht: Kluwer 1989, pp. 443–453.

  11. 11.

    “For some people metaphysics is a general theory of objects (ontology)—a discipline which is to be developed in a purely empirical way, and which differs from other empirical sciences only by its generality … I think that in any case metaphysics in this conception is not objectionable to anybody” (A. Tarski, “The Semantic Conception of Truth”, in: Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 4, 1944, pp. 341–376; p. 363).

  12. 12.

    J. Woleński, Logic and Philosophy in the Lvov-Warsaw School, p. 153.

  13. 13.

    J. Łukasiewicz, Über den Satz des Widerspruchs bei Aristoteles, p. 10.

  14. 14.

    K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations; A Psychological Investigation (1894). Translated by R. Grossmann. The Hague: Nijhoff 1977.

  15. 15.

    “Es gibt gegenstandslose Vorstellungen” (Brentano, Logik MS, 13.019 [5]) (F. Brentano, Logik MS. EL 80, R. Rollinger (Ed.). Salzburg 2011). Cf. R.D. Rollinger, “Brentano’s Psychology and Logic and the Basis of Twardowski’s Theory of Presentations”, The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 4, 2009, pp. 1–23; p. 17, note 37. Brentano uses in contexts like these the term “(äusserer) Gegenstand” rather than “Objekt”; cf. Logik MS, 13.018 [4].

  16. 16.

    See M. van der Schaar, Kazimierz Twardowski: a Grammar for Philosophy. Leiden: Brill /Rodopi 2015. A more extensive comparison between Brentano’s and Twardowski’s account of intentionality is also given in: M. van der Schaar, “Brentano, Twardowski, Stout; from Psychology to Ontology”, in M. Beaney (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy. Suppl. online edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2016.

  17. 17.

    K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 7. K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen; Eine psychologische Untersuchung (1894). Munich: Philosophia Verlag 1982; p. 9.

  18. 18.

    K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 49. K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 51.

  19. 19.

    It may mislead us, as it did Husserl, that Twardowski uses the term “intentional object” for the content of the act (K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 40).

  20. 20.

    K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 34; K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 37.

  21. 21.

    B. Bolzano, Wissenschaftslehre, §67.

  22. 22.

    R. Carnap, “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache”, in: Erkenntnis 2, 1932, pp. 219–241.

  23. 23.

    R. Carnap, “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache”, p. 230.

  24. 24.

    K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations; A Psychological Investigation, p. 32.

  25. 25.

    Ibid., p. 20.

  26. 26.

    R. Carnap, “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache”, p. 237.

  27. 27.

    Ibid.

  28. 28.

    K. Twardowski, “Psychology vs. Physiology and Philosophy” (1897), in: K. Twardowski, On Actions, Products and other Topics in Philosophy. J.L. Brandl, J. Woleński (Eds.). Amsterdam: Rodopi 1999, pp. 41–64; p. 57.

  29. 29.

    Ibid., p. 63

  30. 30.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 37; K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 35.

  31. 31.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 91; K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 86.

  32. 32.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, pp. 35, 36;. K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 33.

  33. 33.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 37.

  34. 34.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 25; K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 23.

  35. 35.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, pp. 24, 25.

  36. 36.

    Ibid., pp. 23, 24.

  37. 37.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 39; K. Twardowski, On the Content and Object of Presentations, p. 36.

  38. 38.

    B. Russell, Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London: Allen & Unwin 1919, p. 169.

  39. 39.

    K. Twardowski, Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen, p. 37.

  40. 40.

    See the section on metaphysics and mereology in M. van der Schaar, Kazimierz Twardowski: a Grammar for Philosophy.

  41. 41.

    K. Twardowski, “Letter to Meinong, July, 11, 1897”, in: R. Kindinger (ed.), Philosophenbriefe – Aus der wissenschaftliche Korrespondenz von Alexius Meinong. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt 1965, pp. 143–144.

  42. 42.

    K. Twardowski, “Opening Lecture at the Lvov University” (1895), in: K. Twardowski, On Prejudices, Judgments, and Other Topics in Philosophy. A. Brożek, J.J. Jadacki (Eds.). Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 102. Amsterdam: Brill Rodopi 2015, pp. 35–43; p. 37.

  43. 43.

    A more extensive defence of the thesis that Twardowski has developed a notion of state of affairs as the object of judgement is given in: A. Betti, M. van der Schaar, “The Road from Vienna to Lvov; Twardowski’s Theory of Judgement between 1894 and 1897”. Grazer Philosophische Studien, 67, 2004, pp. 1–20.

  44. 44.

    K. Twardowski, “Address at the 25th anniversary session of the Polish Philosophical Society” (1929), in: K. Twardowski, On Actions, Products and other Topics in Philosophy. J.L. Brandl, J. Woleński (Eds.). Amsterdam: Rodopi 1999, pp. 271–276; pp. 275, 276.

References

  • Betti, A., and M. van der Schaar. 2004. The Road from Vienna to Lvov; Twardowski’s Theory of Judgement Between 1894 and 1897. Grazer Philosophische Studien 67: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolzano, B. 1837. Wissenschaftslehre, Berg J. ed. Bernard Bolzano-Gesamtausgabe. In E. Winter and J. Berg, eds. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann 1985, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brentano, F. 2011. Logik MS. EL 80, ed. R. Rollinger Salzburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R. 1932. Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache. Erkenntnis 2: 219–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. 1900. Prolegomena zur reinen Logik. In Logische Untersuchungen, ed. E. Ströker. Hamburg: Felix Meiner 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kokoszyńska, M. 1938. W sprawie walki z metafizyką [On the Battle Against Metaphysics]. Przegląd Filozoficzny 41: 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Łukasiewicz, J. 1910. Über den Satz des Widerspruchs bei Aristoteles. Hildesheim, etc.: Georg Olms 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mach, E. 1886. Die Analyse der Empfindungen. Darmstadt: Wissenschafliche Buchgesellschaft 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rojszczak, A., and B. Smith. 2003. Truthmakers, Truthbearers and the Objectivity of Truth. In Philosophy and Logic. In Search of the Polish Tradition, ed. J. Hintikka et al., 229–268. Amsterdam: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rollinger, R.D. 2009. Brentano’s Psychology and Logic and the Basis of Twardowski’s Theory of Presentations, The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 4: 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. 1919. Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy. London: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadler, F. 1997. Studien zum Wiener Kreis. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarski, A. 1944. The Semantic Conception of Truth. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 4: 341–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twardowski, K. 1894a. Zur Lehre vom Inhalt und Gegenstand der Vorstellungen; Eine psychologische Untersuchung. Munich: Philosophia Verlag 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1894b. On the Content and Object of Presentations; A Psychological Investigation (trans: Grossmann, R.). The Hague: Nijhoff 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1895. Opening Lecture at the Lvov University. In On Prejudices, Judgments, and Other Topics in Philosophy, ed. A. Brożek and J.J. Jadacki, 35–43. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, 102. Amsterdam: Brill/Rodopi 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1897. Psychology vs. Physiology and Philosophy. In On Actions, Products and other Topics in Philosophy, eds. J.L. Brandl and J. Woleński, 41–64. Amsterdam: Rodopi 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1965. Letter to Meinong, July, 11, 1897. In Philosophenbriefe – Aus der wissenschaftliche Korrespondenz von Alexius Meinong, ed. R. Kindinger, 143–144. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999a. Address at the 25th anniversary session of the Polish Philosophical Society (1929). In On Actions, Products and other Topics in Philosophy, ed. J.L. Brandl and J. Woleński, 271–276. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999b. On Actions, Products and Other Topics. In Philosophy, ed. J.L. Brandl and J. Woleński. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. On Prejudices, Judgments, and Other Topics in Philosophy. In Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, ed. A. Brożek and J.J. Jadacki, Vol. 102. Amsterdam: Brill/Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Schaar, M. 2015. Kazimierz Twardowski: A Grammar for Philosophy. Leiden: Brill/Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. Brentano, Twardowski, Stout; from Psychology to Ontology. In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy, ed. M. Beaney, Suppl. online edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woleński, J. 1989a. Logic and Philosophy in the Lvov-Warsaw School. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1989b. The Lvov-Warsaw School and the Vienna Circle. In The Vienna Circle and the Lvov-Warsaw School, ed. K. Szaniawski, 443–453. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Maria van der Schaar

Authors
  1. Maria van der Schaar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria van der Schaar .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Philosophy, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Anna Brożek

  2. Institute Vienna Circle, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Friedrich Stadler

  3. University of Information, Technology and Management, Rzeszów, Poland

    Jan Woleński

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van der Schaar, M. (2017). Metaphysics and the Logical Analysis of ‘Nothing’. In: Brożek, A., Stadler, F., Woleński, J. (eds) The Significance of the Lvov-Warsaw School in the European Culture. Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52869-4_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation