Carnap's essay on Heidegger completely missed the point, as well as Heidegger's central thesis, which was specifically that "nothing" is not a thing. Carnap then procedes to treat Heidegger as if the matter was dealing with "nothing" as if it were a thing.
Logical positivism logically (heh) entails either mysticism or idealism. Wittgenstein was being consistent, and Carnap was being, well, dumb as a rock.
--- On Sat, 8/22/09, Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com> wrote:
> From: Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Review of Badiou's Number and Numbers
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Cc: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Saturday, August 22, 2009, 10:51 PM
> >
> I take it that you are referring to Carnap's essay, ""The
> Elimination of
> Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language," in
> which
> he attacks Heidegger while praising Nietzsche.
>
> The relationship between Carnap and Heidegger has received
> much scholarly attention in recent years, starting with
> Michael
> Friedman's, A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer and
> Heidegger.
> A couple of interesting pieces include, "Heidegger and
> Carnap
> on the Overcoming of Metaphysics,"
> (http://people.ucsc.edu/~abestone/papers/uberwindung.pdf
> )
>
> and "Carnap's 'Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical
> Analysis of Language'. A Retrospective Consideration of the
>
> Relationship between Continental and Analytic Philosophy"
> (http://www.phil.cmu.edu/projects/carnap/jena/GabrielJena.rtf).
>
> As far as your point about the Vienna Circle allegedly
> using
> the insights of smart people that they did not understand,
> well Wittgenstein seems to have made that sort of
> complaint
> against them. On the other hand it seems to me that
> if excise from the early Wittgenstein all the mystical
> bits,
> you are left with something like the positivists' picture
> of Wittgenstein.
>
> Jim F.
>
> >
> > --- On Sat, 8/22/09, Jim Farmelant <farmelantj at juno.com>
> wrote:
> > > Yes he was. He was also a metaphysical
> idealist and
> > > a theist, who presented his own version of the
> ontological
> > > argument, using modal logic. It is curious
> fact that
> > > he
> > > was ever a member of the Vienna Circle, when
> > > he held views diametrically opposed to those
> > > held by the rest of the Circle, but he shared
> > > their interest in mathematical logic and its
> > > philosophical implications
> > >
> > > Jim Farmelant
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --- On Sun, 7/26/09, ravi <ravi at platosbeard.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is the problem with the deep
> platonism
> > > of this
> > > > > idea. Crudely put
> > > > > > it was destroyed by Goedel's dual
> theorems
> > > on
> > > > > consistancy and
> > > > > > completeness.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___________________________________
> > > > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> ____________________________________________________________
> > > The Art Institutes
> > > Live your passion. Pursue a web design &
> interactive
> > > media degree.
> > >
> >
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/c?cp=LBkPDPl6cYJ8S3ozXgiCuQAAJ1D
> oEMrytxsVXKlEh0tvqeWlAAQAAAAFAAAAAClcTz4AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEFRAAAAAA==
> > > ___________________________________
> > > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>