...metaphysics. ^2.1

On this my disagreement with Carnap lies only in the scope of applicability of the term metaphysics. It does not constitute metaphysics under either of the two principle categories which constitute metaphysics for Carnap. I take great care to make the meaning of these concepts definite and clear, so meaninglessness, I hope, is avoided. Nor does this kind of metaphysics constitute, in our framework, a priori justifications about synthetic claims.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... Ionia^3.1

A part of classical Greece now belonging to coastal Anatolia, itself a part of Turkey.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

... arguments^3.2

Of which the best known that of Achilles and the Tortoise.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

...^5.1

The classic example of such a prover is NQTHM, a theorem prover first developed at the University of Edinburgh by Robert Boyer and Jay Moore, others in this genre include PVS from the Stanford Research Institute, and Eves, developed by a small Canadian company.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.