Vindicating the verifiability criterion

The aim of this paper is to argue for a revised and precisified version of the infamous Verifiability Criterion for the meaningfulness of declarative sentences. The argument is based on independently plausible premises concerning probabilistic confirmation and meaning as context-change potential, it is shown to be logically valid, and its ramifications for potential applications of the criterion are being discussed. Although the paper is not historical but systematic, the criterion thus vindicated will resemble the original one(s) in some important ways. At the same time, it will also be more modest insofar as meaningfulness will turn out to be relativized linguistically and probabilistically, and different choices of the linguistic and probabilistic parameters may lead to different verdicts on meaningfulness.

Automated summary

This paper argues for a revised version of the Verifiability Criterion, supported by probabilities and the potential for meaning as context change. It discusses the logical validity of the argument and its implications for potential applications of the criterion. The paper also highlights the relativity of meaning to language and probability, suggesting that different parameter choices may result in different judgments on meaning.