Austin [Yuchen Jiang]

The verification theory of meaning requires empirical observations to provide a statement with certain verification; this way of verifying a statement gives rise to the meaning of that statement. Yet verification requires empirical observation, which has the shares same feature with descriptive theories since it has to still works with different empirically observed properties of things. In this ways, it cannot escape the accusation of committing the descriptive fallacy, where it still concerns the true or false of a statement according to certain empirically perceived properties.

However, if taking his view as an emphasis on the way of verification then his view of verification theory would escape the criticism of committing the descriptive fallacy. Concerning the way of verification is concern how it a statement should be verified, rather than what empirical facts so be used to verify a statement. Thus, merely concerning the way of verification does not require to incorporating empirical facts, moreover, it does not concerns whether if something is true, rather it concerns that based on what method can a statement be judged to be true. Here, the verification view may be free from the guilty of descriptive fallacy.

How a meaning of a sentence be determined by the way to verify it? Is that means that if there are various ways to verify a statement, then there would be various meaning of a statement? If this is the case, then how can meanings be settled?