Logical positivism asserts that only statements about empirical observations are meaningful, effectively asserting that all metaphysical statements are meaningless. Unfortunately, this fundamental tenet of logical positivism belongs to the family of statements that it asserts to be meaningless. As a result, the entire edifice of logical positivism vanishes in a puff of logic. This insight appears not to have occurred to the logical positivist school of philosophers. urban dictionary I find this a little funny. A movement stating all and [only] statements about empiricial observasions are meaningful (then, showing that all metaphysicial statements are meaningless). It is clear how it falls to bits, and like I said I think this is funny. It's like saying, ____ What? What are the tenets of logicial positivism? Why was it believed? Can we entertain it for a while? I'd like to. But of course it couldn't hold up to actual belief.... Otherwise as the article says, you're simply holding up the very thing your dismissing. Which is like saying 'this is so' because 'this is also not so'. Which is, fundamentally halarious. But why did they believe it. How could they have been driven to?
Does it assert that using empirical observations to construct a theory about something that we have not observed yet is meaningless (i.e. the whole of theoretical physics)?
