What is Chomsky's statement called? It doesn't seem like it's falsifiable,
axiomatic or tautological. (That would falsify Brett's statement that
"statements are either falsifiable, axiomatic or tautological".).
> And there are statements which do hold meaning,
>yet are non-falsifiable, such as "That's a really good movie"; statements
>of opinion are dependent on internal standards, and thus can't be
>coherently argued with without establishing some common bases for
>judgement ("But you said the star sucked!").
What do you call an ambiguous statement like that? It too, does not seem
to fall into any of the 3 categories mentioned.
Is the statement, "Tautologies are useless but falsifiable statements are
useful" tautological or falsifiable?
--David R.