# 分析与综合之分

> 【EN】“Analytic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are doctors,” have historically been characterized as ones that are true by virtue of the meanings of their words alone and/or can be known to be so solely by knowing those meanings. They are contrasted with more usual “synthetic” sentences, such as “Pediatricians are rich,” (knowledge of) whose truth depends also upon (knowledge of) the worldly fortunes of pediatricians. Beginning with Frege, many philosophers hoped to show that the truths of logic and mathematics and other apparently a priori domains, such as much of philosophy and the foundations of science, could be shown to be analytic by careful “conceptual analysis” of the meanings of crucial words. … 【中】词条从康德、弗雷格对这一区分的直觉表述讲起，说明它为何曾被寄予厚望，尤其是用于说明数学知识的可能性，以及科学之外诸多领域的先天性。随后考察它遭遇的难题：分析悖论、逻辑主义的问题、约定论，以及证实主义与确证整体论带来的冲击。

- ID: m13152
- 分类: culture
- 领域: 哲学

## 定义

分析句如儿科医生是医生，传统上被刻画为仅凭语词意义即为真、且仅凭理解意义即可知其为真的句子；综合句如儿科医生很富有，其真假还取决于世界中儿科医生的实际境况。这一区分曾被视为哲学与逻辑的基石。 脚手架作用：- 判断来源：追问命题之真来自语词意义还是世界事实，据此确定需要何种证据。 - 检验定义：发现看似分析的句子其实依赖经验输入时，及时拆穿伪自明。

## 机制

区分的成立依赖两个可分离的支点：一是意义的构成性，真值由语词意义单独决定；二是认识的先天性，无需经验调查即可知道。当意义被理解为同义性或定义时，前一个支点显得稳固；但一旦承认意义随理论整体变动，或承认定义本身需要经验输入，两个支点就会彼此脱钩。

## 练习

1) 挑出一个句子，问要判断它真假，除理解词义外还需不需要查世界；2) 试着把它的真归到定义或同义替换上，看是否真能成立；3) 检查该定义本身是否依赖经验知识；4) 若依赖，就把它重新归为综合句，并说明其必然性来自何处。

## 脚手架用法

- 判断来源：追问命题之真来自语词意义还是世界事实，据此确定需要何种证据。 - 检验定义：发现看似分析的句子其实依赖经验输入时，及时拆穿伪自明。

[阅读网页](https://thinkingmodels.site/entries/detail/m13152)