• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.287-322
• /
• 2014

We put forward a scheme of the theory of analysis, and G. E. Moore's theory of analysis is reconstructed. As C. H. Langford pointed out, Moore's theory commits to the paradox of analysis which says that if a analysis is correct then it is not informative, and if it is informative it is not correct. For, according to his theory, analysing statement is necessarily true identity statement and have some information. Moorean responses which is given by Max Black, Raymond Bradley and Norman Swartz, and Wilfrid Sellars rely on the distinction between the information about concepts and linguistic entity. These approaches are deficient in dealing properly with the difference in concepts as analysandum and analysans. Also, non-Moorean resolutions asserted by Myers, King, Black, and Earl are examined.