The Human Question

You objected to what I had said before with the following words: This statement makes no sense to me! According to logical positivism, logical necessity is the only necessity there is regarding statements about nature since empirical science consists only ofpatterns in experience and the deductive (logically necessary (analytic aprior) relations that follow from them. The logical positivists/empiricists believe that is the only necessity pertaining to statements in science (since they (Hume/Leibnitz/but not Kant) deny synthetic apriori judgments.) Then you go on to say that science cannot tell us whether events happen necessarily. I'll take that as a rehash of the Empiricist/Logical Positivist position that there can be no synthetic aprior judgments . You can't have your cake and eat it too. Knowlege is possible in science! [Incidentally, I do believe as Kant did that synthetic apriori knowledge is possible. I would replace the transcendentally ideals of space and time (wh...