1. At the top of p. 107, Carnap lists four questions that he takes to be mere variants of a single question. Are they?
2. Carnap's criterion for the meaningfulness of a word is that there is a method of verification for the "elementary sentence" in which it occurs (108–109). On p. 114, he says that the statements of mathematics are meaningful though "they say nothing about reality." Are those two claims compatible? (I have no clear answer to the question, but the kinds of considerations I have in mind have to do with whether "there are two %$x$%s" and "%$x$% is a prime number" and "%$P$% and %$Q$%" are meaningful.)
3. On p. 110, Carnap says that "Caesar is a prime number" is meaningless. Would Frege, Russell, or Strawson agree?
4. Assess Carnap's criticism (p. 113) of cogito, ergo sum.

-- ShaughanLavine - 26 Sep 2005