The Context of the Development of Carnap’s Views on Logic up to the Aufbau

Abstract

Friedman, Richardson, and others have helpfully foregrounded the neglected presence of Kantian and neo-Kantian influences on the early Carnap. Here, however, I sound a cautionary note, highlighting a dimension along which early Carnap departs directly from Kant and neo-Kantianism, swinging much closer to Russell – namely, in his conception of logic’s subject-matter. For while Kant and neo-Kantians conceive of logic as a science concerned primarily with mental activity and its (ideal) contents (concepts, Fregean ‘Sinne’), Carnap (mostly) follows Russell in seeing logic as primarily concerned with the objectivities represented by such contents through such acts – i.e., with the objects, properties, states of affairs, facts (and so on) that together constitute the world’s most general or universal features. But then, because Carnap also follows Russell in placing logic at the very basis of his own constitution programme, I conclude that Russellian doctrines lie at the heart of Carnap’s Aufbau project, which means that we must also orient our understanding of early Carnap on central points by reference to decidedly non-Kantian threads.

For very useful discussion of an earlier draft of this paper (and much else), I would like to thank the audience at the Carnap conference organized by Christian Damböck at the LMU-Munich in July 2013, especially Michael Friedman and Tom Ryckman . As will become clear in what follows, my largest debt by far in my understanding of the early Carnap is owed to Michael’s wonderfully rich and thoughtful writings on this and related topics. I would also like to thank Erich Reck and André Carus for very helpful and engaging conversations during the writing of this paper, as well as an anonymous referee for the Yearbook for their comments.