Die Stellung Otto Neuraths zur Deutschen Schulsoziologie der Zwanziger und Dreißiger Jahre wkd dargestellt, zum Teü anhand von Zitaten aus seinen Schriften, zum Teü anhand von Auszügen aus Briefen an seinen Sohn, in denen er gegen dessen Wunsch, Soziologie zu studieren, argumentiert. Hauptargument: daß Soziologie kein "Fach" mit einem einigermaßen klar definierten Wissen sei, das man durch systematisches Studium erwerben und in dem man dann einem gesellschaftlich anerkannten Beruf nachgehen kann. Die Briefe enthalten einiges über Otto Neuraths, wie (...) er sagt, etwas zufälligen Weg zu den Sozialwissenschaften. (shrink)

Die Stellung Otto Neuraths zur Deutschen Schulsoziologie der Zwanziger und Dreißiger Jahre wkd dargestellt, zum Teü anhand von Zitaten aus seinen Schriften, zum Teü anhand von Auszügen aus Briefen an seinen Sohn, in denen er gegen dessen Wunsch, Soziologie zu studieren, argumentiert. Hauptargument: daß Soziologie kein "Fach" mit einem einigermaßen klar definierten Wissen sei, das man durch systematisches Studium erwerben und in dem man dann einem gesellschaftlich anerkannten Beruf nachgehen kann. Die Briefe enthalten einiges über Otto Neuraths, wie (...) er sagt, etwas zufälligen Weg zu den Sozialwissenschaften. (shrink)

Otto Neurath’s empiricist methodology of economics and his contributions to politi- cal economy have gained increasing attention in recent years. We connect this research with contemporary debates regarding the epistemological status of thought experiments by reconstructing Neurath’s utopias as linchpins of thought experiments. In our three reconstructed examples of different uses of utopias/dystopias in thought experiments we employ a reformulation of Häggqvist’s model for thought experiments and we argue that: (1) Our reformulation of Häggqvist’s model more adequately complies with (...) many uses of thought experiments, especially with the open-ended discussions of utopias and dys- topias in thought experiments. (2) As a strict logical empiricist, Neurath is committed to a strictly empiricist account of thought experiments. John Norton’s empiricist argument view can indeed account for the justifications of empirical beliefs and genuine discoveries targeted by scientific utopianism in three distinct (yet connected) ways, all of which Neur- ath already contemplated: (2.I) Dealing with utopias and thought experiments on a regular basis increases creativity and inventiveness. (2.II) Particular ways of presenting knowl- edge facilitate scientific discovery and social progress. (2.III) The use of utopias in thought experiments can prompt conceptual change and allow access to new phenomena. We con- clude by highlighting that, even though thought experiments support a positive attitude for exploring new social possibilities, Neurath points out that active decisions are unavoidable. The exploration of alternatives and the awareness of a need for decisions in policy discus- sion avert a technocratic outlook in social science. (shrink)

An international team of four authors, led by distinguished philosopher of science, Nancy Cartwright, and leading scholar of the Vienna Circle, Thomas E. Uebel, have produced this lucid and elegant study of a much-neglected figure. The book, which depicts Neurath's science in the political, economic and intellectual milieu in which it was practised, is divided into three sections: Neurath's biographical background and the socio-political context of his economic ideas; the development of his theory of science; and his legacy as illustrated (...) by his contemporaneous involvement in academic and political debates. Coinciding with the renewal of interest in logical positivism, this is a timely publication which will redress a current imbalance in the history and philosophy of science, as well as making a major contribution to our understanding of the intellectual life of Austro-Germany in the inter-war years. (shrink)

In this article, I discuss Otto Neurath’s philosophy in the context of Vienna Circle modernism. Following recent scholarship, the discussion considers as a starting point Neurath’s participation at the fourth International Congress of Modern Architecture (CIAM IV). However, the image of Neurath’s modernism that results from this perspective is incomplete because it tends to overlook the importance of scientific utopianism in Neurath’s thought. Scientific utopianism is a methodology proposed by Neurath for the social sciences in technological contexts, in which (...) scientists elaborate and develop plans (utopias) for the transformation of society, thus contributing to an informed societal debate. Decisions are nevertheless kept outside the domain of scientific activity. I claim that recognizing the centrality of scientific utopianism in Neurath’s philosophy is fundamental to understand Neurath’s modernism. This interpretation highlights the affinities of Neurath’s philosophy of the social sciences with the modern utopianism of H. G. Wells. Both authors consider that there can be no ultimate solution to social problems but that a plural and constant debate of proposals is fundamental for the improvement of society. Therefore, Neurath’s modernism connects his philosophy of science to the literary utopian tradition. (shrink)

Logical empiricism and the Austrian School of economics are two of the internationally most influential intellectual movements with Viennese roots. By and large independently of each other, both have been subject to detailed historical and philosophical investigations for the last two dec-ades. However, in spite of numerous connections and interactions be-tween the two groups, their relationship has captured surprisingly sparse attention. My dissertation focuses on the many-faceted juxtaposition of two supposedly antagonistic championsof Viennese Late Enlightenment: logical empiricist Otto Neurath (...) and Austrian economist Ludwig Mises. I rationally reconstruct and critically compare their epistemological, meth-odological, and economic positions and demonstrate that a closer look reveals more compatibilities and similarities than acknowledged by the received view and by the protagonists themselves. Over and above the historiographic task of challenging and amending this received view, the analytic components of my thesis inform contemporary debates in phi-losophy, politics, economics, and other sciences. (shrink)

Friedrich Stadler und sein Team schließen über 40 Jahre nach Präsentation der ersten beiden Bände das von Rudolf Haller initiierte Projekt einer umfassenden Werkschau Otto Neuraths (1882–1945) ab. In acht Bänden wird auf fast 5.000 Seiten das Schaffen eines Polyhistors dokumentiert und zugänglich gemacht, dessen intellektueller Spannweite man nicht einmal gerecht wird, wenn man ihn als Philosophen, Nationalökonomen, Gesellschaftstechniker und Aufklärer bezeichnet.

Four distinguished authors have been brought together to produce this elegant study of a much-neglected figure. The book is divided into three sections: Neurath's biographical background and the economic and social context of his ideas; his theory of science; and the development of his role in debates on Marxist concepts of history and his own conception of science. Coinciding with the emerging serious interest in logical positivism, this timely publication will redress a current imbalance in the history and philosophy of (...) science. (shrink)

Otto Neurath’s empiricist methodology of economics and his contributions to political economy have gained increasing attention in recent years. We connect this research with contemporary debates regarding the epistemological status of thought experiments by reconstructing Neurath’s utopias as linchpins of thought experiments. In our three reconstructed examples of different uses of utopias/dystopias in thought experiments we employ a reformulation of Häggqvist’s model for thought experiments and we argue that: (1) Our reformulation of Häggqvist’s model more adequately complies with many (...) uses of thought experiments, especially with the open-ended discussions of utopias and dystopias in thought experiments. (2) As a strict logical empiricist, Neurath is committed to a strictly empiricist account of thought experiments. John Norton’s empiricist argument view can indeed account for the justifications of empirical beliefs and genuine discoveries targeted by scientific utopianism in three distinct (yet connected) ways, all of which Neurath already contemplated: (2.I) Dealing with utopias and thought experiments on a regular basis increases creativity and inventiveness. (2.II) Particular ways of presenting knowledge facilitate scientific discovery and social progress. (2.III) The use of utopias in thought experiments can prompt conceptual change and allow access to new phenomena. We conclude by highlighting that, even though thought experiments support a positive attitude for exploring new social possibilities, Neurath points out that active decisions are unavoidable. The exploration of alternatives and the awareness of a need for decisions in policy discussion avert a technocratic outlook in social science. (shrink)

In the first part of this paper I review the two most recent biographies on Otto Neurath and Ludwig von Mises as well as the scarce literature on the relations between their lives and ideas. Recent publications by Nemeth, O’Neill, and Uebel reflect growing interest in the connections between these two main proponents of Logical Empiricism and the Austrian School of Economics respectively, but are mainly focused on the so-called socialist calculation debates. In the second part I propose that (...) additional research on Neurath’s and Mises’ idiosyncratic positions is likely to uncover general relations between epistemological assumptions, economic theories, and political views. -/- . (shrink)

Otto Neurath's thesis concerning the structure of protocol sentences is central to the famous Protocol Sentence Debate in the Vienna Circle. However, its precise nature is far from easy to discern in Neurath's writings. So far, only Thomas Uebel has attempted a closer analysis of Neurath's contribution to the debate. I argue that Uebel's interpretation is problematic in some respects and propose a novel analysis, which hopefully brings into a clearer light Neurath's position in the Protocol Sentence Debate as (...) well as his relevance to contemporary philosophies of science. (shrink)

It is one of the distinctive claims of Neurath, though not of the Vienna Circle generally, that the Vienna Circle's philosophy was not really German philosophy at all. The relation is, if Neurath is to be trusted, anything but straight-forward. To understand it, not only must some effort be expended on specifying Neurath's claim, but also on delineating the different party-lines within the Vienna Circle.

Otto Neurath is well known as a founding member of the Vienna Circle, one of several points of origin of logical empiricism or neopositivism. While Neurath’s distinctive contribution to the philosophy of science and epistemology in general has come to be recognised after long neglect, his economic thought remains relatively unexplored. A striking fact has thus remained long obscured: Neurath is not the “positivist” economist one might expect. To throw this point into further relief, the question I want to (...) explore here is whether and to what extent, if any, it makes sense to look at Neurath as an “Austrian” economist. Aware of the danger of treading a thin line between blatant absurdity and Pickwickian banality, my hope is that this way of proceeding will unlock some of the still topical originality of Neurath’s economics.What would seem to render my leading thought absurd is, of course, the acrimonious debate between Ludwig von Mises and Neurath . This early phase of the socialist calculation debate pitched Neurath very much against thirdgeneration representatives of the so-called Austrian School of Theoretical Economics. And what seems to render my leading thought Pickwickian is the unspectacular fact that Neurath was of Austrian nationality. It is true, of course, that he was a self-consciously “Austrian philosopher”, but that does not make him an Austrian economist in the relevant sense. Yet when we delve into the depths of the debate with Mises, things begin to look quite different. (shrink)

Die im Wiener Kreis dominierenden konträren Derücer Otto Neurath und Moritz Schlick werden jeweüs mit einem historisch-genetischen Profil persönlich, wissenschaftlich-phüosophisch und politisch charakterisiert. Dabei wüd trotz verschiedener Differenzen — als Extrempositionen im pluralistisch-heterogenen Wiener Kreis — die gemeinsame Müiimalplattform eüier "wissenschaftlichen Weltauffassung" und das Bekenntnis zu einer als neuartig verstandenen Forschergemeinschaft transparent. Erst vor diesem Hintergrund sind die beiden Denker- und Persönlichkeitsphysiognomien in einen adäquaten Kontext gestellt: während bei Neurath eine konsistente Entwicklung von den Modellen einer "wissenschaftlichen Philosophie", "Einheitswissenschaft" (...) bis zur "Enzyklopädie" im Zusammenhang mit einem Sozialreformerischen Programm und funktionaler Antimetaphysik zu erkennen ist, wird bei Schlick der Dualismus von Philosophie und Wissenschaft neben einem politischen Liberalismus beibehalten. Auf allgemeinster Ebene kollidieren"phüosophiefreier" RELATIVISMUS und "philosophischer" ABSOLUTISMUS. (shrink)

Four distinguished authors have been brought together to produce this elegant study of a much-neglected figure. The book is divided into three sections: Neurath's biographical background and the economic and social context of his ideas; his theory of science; and the development of his role in debates on Marxist concepts of history and his own conception of science. Coinciding with the emerging serious interest in logical positivism, this timely publication will redress a current imbalance in the history and philosophy of (...) science. (shrink)

Die im Wiener Kreis dominierenden konträren Derücer Otto Neurath und Moritz Schlick werden jeweüs mit einem historisch-genetischen Profil persönlich, wissenschaftlich-phüosophisch und politisch charakterisiert. Dabei wüd trotz verschiedener Differenzen — als Extrempositionen im pluralistisch-heterogenen Wiener Kreis — die gemeinsame Müiimalplattform eüier "wissenschaftlichen Weltauffassung" und das Bekenntnis zu einer als neuartig verstandenen Forschergemeinschaft transparent. Erst vor diesem Hintergrund sind die beiden Denker- und Persönlichkeitsphysiognomien in einen adäquaten Kontext gestellt: während bei Neurath eine konsistente Entwicklung von den Modellen einer "wissenschaftlichen Philosophie", "Einheitswissenschaft" (...) bis zur "Enzyklopädie" im Zusammenhang mit einem Sozialreformerischen Programm und funktionaler Antimetaphysik zu erkennen ist, wird bei Schlick der Dualismus von Philosophie und Wissenschaft neben einem politischen Liberalismus beibehalten. Auf allgemeinster Ebene kollidieren"phüosophiefreier" RELATIVISMUS und "philosophischer" ABSOLUTISMUS. (shrink)

The question of philosophy’s relevance to extra-academic concerns is much with us today. Plato tells us that, once the philosopher has seen the truth in the full light of the sun, she must return to the cave, there to put knowledge to work in making a better world, even though, being temporarily unaccustomed to the dark, she risks ridicule from those still in thrall to illusion. This paper reflects upon the life and career of Otto Neurath as a modern (...) exemplification of this ideal of philosophical engagement. In spite of, or, perhaps, because of his never having held an academic appointment, Neurath made a difference for the good in human affairs. The key components of what I term Neurath’s “philosophy of science in action” are explicated in order to understand how that could be. Foregrounded are Neurath’s socialism, his own version of the thesis of the empirical underdetermination of theory by evidence, his anti-metaphysical stance, and his commitment to physicalism and the unity of science. The paper concludes with a discussion of the contemporary relevance of Neurath’s model of engaged philosophy of science. (shrink)

This paper provides a description and analysis of Wilhelm Neurath's economics and theory of value. Otto Neurath's rejection of a distinct methodology for social science and his insistence on the political partisanship of scientific sociology, I argue, represent his attempt to both continue the practical orientation of his father's theorizing and answer the normative problem his father's theories faced.

This paper provides a description and analysis of Wilhelm Neurath's economics and theory of value. Otto Neurath's rejection of a distinct methodology for social science and his insistence on the political partisanship of scientific sociology, I argue, represent his attempt to both continue the practical orientation of his father's theorizing and answer the normative problem his father's theories faced.

Review of John Symons, Olga Pombo, and Juan Manuel Torres. 2011. Otto Neurath and the Unity of Science. Dordrecht: Springer.

Otto Neurath (1882-1945) was a highly unorthodox thinker both in philosophy and economics. The contributions to this sparkling new book conclude that Neurath touched on many of the most critical problems of economic theory during its formative years as a modern discipline. His economics provide insights into the foundational problems of modern economics and should encourage contemporary economic theorists to critically reflect their own hidden presumptions.

Otto Neurath's everyday "cabby"-language would only have preserved its appearance of a conceptual (etc.) system-neutrality to the extent at which it were to retain its semantic amorphousness as well as its user's shallow pragmatic mtentions. This (pseudo) neutrality would be irretrievably lost the moment the constituent parts of the everyday "cabby"-language were to be precised to a degree which transcended all conceivable pragmatic mtentions reasonably attributable to a cabman or to any other everyday speaker-. Dilemma: Either we settle for (...) a semantically and pragmatically unambitious, superficial chatter, typical of a cabman, whereby we shall gam conceptual (philosophical, theoretical etc....) neutrality, or we relinquish all aspirations towards system neutrality in favor of a higher level of preciseness, which might in turn open the possibüities for some sort of meaningful, even philosophically relevant, discourse. (shrink)

While the Vienna Circle had virtually no impact on the Czech-speaking philosophical community during the 1930s, one can find a curious meeting point in the field of theory of architecture. There is now a growing literature on Otto Neurath as a theorist of architecture and urbanism, who emphasized the social aspects of modern building and approached architecture from his idiosyncratic viewpoint of Marxism interpreted as a physicalistic social science. It is less well known that a young Czech architecture critic (...) and theorist, Karel Teige, cultivated strikingly similar views during the same period—from 1920s to 1930s—albeit without any knowledge of Neurath’s thought in particular, or for that matter the Vienna Circle in general. The chapter reveals similarities as well as differences between Neurath and Teige on Marxism, science and architecture, and the Bauhaus, as well as a discussion of the relations of both to the contemporaries, most importantly Adolf Loos, Josef Frank and Hannes Meyer. (shrink)

La publication des Carnets de Carnap et de sa correspondance avec Neurath nous donne de nouveaux aperçus sur l’histoire de la collaboration et de l’amitié entre les deux hommes, qui fut mise à rude épreuve au cours des cinq dernières années. L’article aborde surtout les points qui n’ont reçu jusqu’à présent aucune attention, ou du moins peu d’attention : d’une part, la question de savoir quand et comment ils sont entrés en contact et, d’autre part, comment leurs relations ont évolué (...) après leur dernière rencontre, au cinquième Congrès international pour l’unité de la science, qui s’est tenu à Harvard en septembre 1939, immédiatement après le déclenchement de la seconde guerre mondiale. (shrink)

In the spring of 1937, the University of Chicago Press mailed hundreds of subscription forms for its latest enterprise – a projected series of twenty short monographs by various philosophers and scientists. Together the monographs were to form the first section of the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. Included in each mailing was an introductory prospectus which began:Recent years have witnessed a striking growth of interest in the scientific enterprise as a whole and especially in the unity of science. The (...) concern throughout the world for the logic of science, the history of science, and the sociology of science reveals a comprehensive international movement interested in considering science as a whole in terms of the scientific temper itself. A science of science is appearing. The extreme specialization within science demands as its corrective an interest in the scientific edifice in its entirety. This is especially necessary if science is to satisfy its inherent urge for the systematization of its results and methods and if science is to perform adequately its educational role in the modern world. Science is gradually rousing itself for the performance of its total task. (shrink)

The ignorance about Otto Neurath’s thought and action within the Vienna Circle as well as within the “scientific philosophy” definitely belongs to the past. In the last two decades the rediscovery of Neurath’s legacy represents one of the most significant aspects of the historical and theoretical studies on logical empiricism. As Friedrich Stadler has recently pointed out, “the rediscovery of Neurath [is] not merely a phenomenon of academic nostalgia, but itself constitutes research into the conditions and possibilities of changing (...) a paradigm in the philosophy of science”1. Particulary in the last ten years this re-evaluation has been the subject of numerous books and contributions, which offer a radically new view of the life, the philosophy of science and knowledge, the political and economical thought of Otto Neurath, and, last but not least, of his enthusiastic activity for the Encyclopedia-project. It is sufficient for the readers of this Yearbook to recall the enlightening reconstruction of the emergence of Neurath’s naturalism within the Vienna Circle offered in 1992 by Thomas E. Uebel and the extensive, critical description of Neurath’s work and life which was published in 1996 by Nancy Cartwright, Jordi Cat, Lola Fleck and Thomas E. Uebel. (shrink)

In this paper I consider Otto Neurath’s late discussion of the political and social context of Plato’s Republic, especially how Neurath conceived them in the 1940s. Neurath’s argumentation is contrasted with the ideas of Karl Popper, both with regard to the latter’s reading of Plato and to his general methodology. The distinction between Neurath’s treatments of epistemology and politics is also discussed, by highlighting how these two were interwoven in the discussion, and how they differentiated Neurath’s articles from Popper’s (...) considerations in the Open Society. (shrink)