66
PARTISAN REVIEW
development in philosophy have imparted peculiar doctrinal traits
to ethical, political and esthetic theories.
Meaning and Truth
One of the outstanding characteristics of scientific discourse is
that it is the result of a deliberate attempt to base assertions on
evidence. To this extent, common sense, philosophy and even the
criticism of the arts can be scientific. Belief or disbelief in a state–
ment will then rest on some procedure whereby the truth of the
statement is tested. Where such tests have not been made, the state–
ment cannot
be
believed or disbelieved; it can be only doubted. But
to doubt an assertion is obviously to regard it as believable or
dis–
believable. The doubt consists in the indecision as to which of these
two attitudes to adopt. In other words, to regard the truth of a
statement as undecided, one must know that its truth can be tested.
If
the statement is not testable, it is not undecided; it
is
merely
meaningless. What is neither believable nor disbelievable, is not even
dubious.
This principle does not limit the use of language in general. It
applies only to statements which are proposed as objects of belief.
Most statements of science, philosophy and criticism are of this
type. But obviously many expressions are formed, especially in lit–
erature, with other ends in view. Logical empiricism does not preclude
such expression. It seeks to formulate a principle whereby they can
be distinguished from cognitive statements.
Something more than a merely formal theory of language is
involved in these considerations. The question is whether meanings
shall
be
determinable by objective, communal procedure, or whether
they can be apprehended only through subjective, sympathetic in–
tuitions. Are theories of society and political institutions to be under–
stood in terms of their overtly testable consequences in theory and
/.ractice, or shall they be viewed as vehicles of some transcendent,
"essential" meanings intelligible only to persOns endowed with special
insights? Shall the criticism of the arts be testable by observation and
analysis, or shall we regard it as an unverifiable revelation, the result
of some unique communion between the critic and his subject?
The answers to these questions neither prove nor disprove the theory
of meaning developed by the logical empiricists. That theory rests
not on these issues, but on the logical analysis of science. These
questions do, however, indicate some of the practical consequences of
a widespread belief in the theory.
This criterion of meaning had been at the basis of pragmatic
methodology. The meaning of a statement, according to pragmatism,
lies in the practical difference between its affirmation and denial.
