約 4,718,269 件
https://w.atwiki.jp/vocaloidenglishlyric/pages/313.html
【Tags Jimmythumb-P Luka tN N】 Original Music Title No Logic Music Lyrics written, Voice edited by ジミーサムP (Jimmythumb-P) / OneRoom Music arranged by ジミーサムP (Jimmythumb-P) / OneRoom Singer 巡音ルカ (Megurine Luka) Click here for the Japanese Lyrics English Lyrics (translated by ikuy398)： Isn t it good enough if just about? Wont it do even if roughly? Can t you live happily better if you leave a little worry? Shouldn t you go to bed as you get tired? Can t you take it easy once in a while? To do what we want to do, were alive, arent you? Isn t it good enough if just about? Isn t it no matter even if you fail? However you are terribly distressed; you know, Finally doesn t it depend on the timing? Having this and that matters, What and how on earth are you intending to do? To do what you want to do, you were born, weren t you? Because I can t make the perfect life-style Because I don t intend to make the perfect life-style I am awkward and keep awkward forever God, can you hear my song? Even if you do not hope I want to be laughing happily, want to cry as want to Want to always just be natural posture Someday everybody will surely regret the today they can t go back to, so I m walking wantonly with such a feeling still now but it s no problem, right? Isn t it good enough if just about? Need not you do too hard? If you put on a forced smile; look, you are not happy at all, aren t you? Having this and that matters, What and how on earth are you intending to do? Anyone never can get the 100% correct answer, right? Because I can t make the perfect life-style Because I don t intend to make the perfect life-style I am imperfect and keep imperfect forever God, can you hear my song? Even if you are not hope I want to be laughing happily, and now, want to shout it Always, the ending is No Logic If someday our dream we only have once reaches the end after all, Only when I want to quit living, I have only to stop and think over, right? "Choosing only what you want to, letting off your worthless things" It s impossible that every one can walk like it, ...right? [Translation notes] the 100% correct answer = In the original, it means "the answer of perfect 100 points score" English Lyrics (translated by vgboy / vgperson)： Isn t this basically good enough? Isn t it fine being adequate? Why not allow a little suspense? Why not lead a fun life? If you re tired, can t you sleep? Isn t some occasional fun good? The things we want to do... aren t they what we re living for? Isn t this basically good enough? Isn t it fine to mess up? If something troubles you, well, isn t that really just for the time being? Take things one at a time, know what you want to do with what The things you want to do... aren t they what you were born for? Since there s no way to live perfectly No one wants to live a perfect way, and so I can be clumsy, and clumsy I ll stay God, can you hear this song? Regardless of what you want of me I want to laugh, and if I want to cry, I will I always want to do what s natural to me No one can experience a moment twice, and some, they ll surely regret So we all walk our own paths with our own feelings, and that s fine Isn t this basically good enough? Isn t it fine not aiming for the impossible? If you re forcing a laugh, well, you can t be having much fun, can you? Take things one at a time, know what you want to do with what Getting a perfect score every time, well, no one can do that, can they? Since there s no way to live perfectly No one wants to live a perfect way, and so I can be imperfect, and imperfect I ll stay God, can you hear this song? Regardless of what you want of me I want to laugh, and now, I want to cry out The conclusion always is, there s no logic In this singular dream of ours, seeing as the end will come someday Only when it s time for life to end will we consider stopping, and that s fine "Choose only what you want, and discard all you don t need" For everyone to think that way... is pointless Singable English Lyrics (by Katerinu2)： Isn t it fine to just know enough? Isn t it fine even if it s rough? Can t you live happily and in peace? Don t let yourself get so worked up Shouldn t you go to bed if you re tired? Shouldn t you take off once in a while? Can t we do whatever we wanna do? We have to enjoy being alive Isn t it fine to just know enough? Isn t it fine even if you re stuck? However depressed you may be; you know, In the end, doesn t it just count on timing? "This and That" sure, I guess it s cool But what on Earth are you trying to do? To do what we have to do, I heard you, You said, "It s what were born for," that true? Because I can t seem to live in the perfect life-style Because I don t intend to live in the perfect life-style I am awkward, so I ll be awkward forever Oh God, tell me, can you hear me now as I sing my song? If you can t, well it s not really you I m singing to I want to be laughing happily I want to cry on and off as I please I only want to be the natural me Someday everyone will regret today and they ll know that, They can t fix it, cuz they all can t go back to it My walk s a little forced, but what I m feeling now is absolutely no problem, Isn t that right? Isn t it good to just know enough? There s no reason for you to be rough I m aware that you re faking it Your smile just doesn t appear to fit "This and That" sure, I guess it s cool But what on Earth are you trying to do? Getting 100% everytime To me, it just seems way too sublime Because I can t seem to live in the perfect life-style Because I don t intend to live in the perfect life-style I m imperfect, so I m imperfect forever Oh God, tell me, can you hear me now as I sing my song? If you can t, well it s not really you I m singing to I want to be laughing happily I want to shout it out whenever I please This makes no sense, This ending has No Logic! If someday this dream we held on so tightly too Gets resolved and draws close to the very bitter end Pause and stop to think, even if it s on the brink, There s always something else waiting, Isn t that right? "You only need to choose what you want Let go of the things you know will cause daunt" For everyone to have the same thought, That s impossible, right? Romaji lyrics (transliterated by motokokusanagi2009)： daitai sore de īnja naino tekitō datte īnja naino sukoshi fuan nokoshita hō ga tanoshiku ikirareru nja naino tsukaretara nereba īnja naino tamaniwa rakushite īnja naino yaritai koto yaru tame ni bokura wa ikite irun deshō daitai sore de īnja naino shippai shitemo īnja naino donna ni nayandatte hora kekkyoku timing nanja naino hitotsu hitotsu kakae konde ittai nani o dōshitai no yaritai koto yaru tame ni kimi wa umarete kitan deshō kanpeki na ikikata nante deki nai kara kanpeki na ikikata nante shitaku nai kara bukiyō na boku wa bukiyō na mama de kami sama kono uta ga kikoeru kai anata ga nozonde inakutemo boku wa waratte itain desu nakitai toki wa nakitain desu itsu datte shizentai de itain desu daremo ga nido to modorenu ima o kitto itsuka kōkai suru kara ima wa mada konna kimochi de kimama ni aruite itatte īyo ne daitai sore de īnja naino muri wa shinakute īnja naino tsukuri warai shitatte hora chittomo tanoshiku nai deshō hitotsu hitotsu kakae konde ittai nani o dōshitai no daremo hyaku ten manten no kotae nante dase nain deshō kanpeki na ikikata nante deki nai kara kanpeki na ikikata nante shitaku nai kara fukanzen na boku wa fukanzen na mama de kami sama kono uta ga kikoeru kai anata ga nozonde inakutemo boku wa waratte itain desu soshite ima sakebi tain desu itsu datte saigo wa No Logic bokura no kono ichido kiri no yume dōse itsuka owari ga kuru nara ikiru koto o yame tai toki dake tachi domatte kangaeru kurai de īyo ne "yari tai koto dake erande ira nai mono kiri sutete" daremo ga minna sonna fūni arukeru wake...nai yone [Jimmythumb-P, JimmythumbP, OneRoom, Jimmy Thumb-P, Jimmy ThumbP]
https://w.atwiki.jp/idungvg/pages/37.html
ADL(A Piece of Soul + Dear Angel + Lourdes Anadem) り お ん(天奈) [A Piece of Soul] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/amana しるふぃ [A Piece of Soul] ttp //yaplog.jp/luicie Reos.R [Dear Angel] ttp //reos.blog12.fc2.com Eisen [Dear Angel] ttp //www.eagle-net.ne.jp/~omoikane CD(Carpe Diem) 葉那瀬 [Carpe Diem] ttp //hanasakune.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ 秋 華 [Carpe Diem] ttp //tukidazo.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ SUMMER DAYS [Carpe Diem] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/rokc makotoR [Carpe Diem] ttp //f49.aaa.livedoor.jp/~makotor/ NENE。 [Carpe Diem] ttp //omochi.poporin.net/ あっ [Carpe Diem] ttp //idun.client.jp/ †シャンテス† [Carpe Diem] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/ashurum0502/ CMD(Cross Axis + Milky Cat s + Dangerous Friends) 烈 [Dangerous Friends] ttp //curuhome.cururu.jp/retu_ro Naftia [Dangerous Friends] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/naf00_desperate ECニパ(Eternal_Moon + Crystals of Wind + (ﾟ▽ﾟ*)ﾆﾊﾟｯ + G.K.200X) 兎夜 [Eternal_Moon] ttp //blogs.dion.ne.jp/silver/ マァナ・エス [Crystals of Wind] ttp //yamana1980.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ Stefan [Crystals of Wind] ttp //tabasco130.blog12.fc2.com/ ΦヨロニパΦ [(ﾟ▽ﾟ*)ﾆﾊﾟｯ] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/nipa/ EPA(EARTH DESIRE + Phoenix + Atlantis) seruferna [EARTH DESIRE] ttp //yaplog.jp/taromaru Phoenix戦記 ttp //ragnaphoenix.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ ユキ [Atlantis] ttp //www.geocities.jp/yukisamagj/ KAGO(喧嘩に来たぜ伊達男 + Abendsonne + Glorious Anthem + Obliterate) ぜろＰ－ [Glorious Anthem] ttp //curuhome.cururu.jp/zerop last.. [Glorious Anthem] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/kieyuku あんじゅー [Glorious Anthem] ttp //annjiru.exblog.jp S的 [喧嘩に来たぜ伊達男] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/reset931/ 大樹 [Abendsonne] ttp //d.hatena.ne.jp/leich/ はにぃ [Abendsonne] ttp //honey821.blog19.fc2.com/ FromL(LapisHeart + Frei Flugel + Reincarnation + 鬼 + Mirage) ゆうまり [Reincarnation] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/gekiama/ サラキア [LapisHeart] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/royal_panic 雪平 あやか [Frei Flugel] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/ayaka1234 螺旋迷宮 [Mirage] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/rasen2/ Tori [LapisHeart] ttp //bocchin.seesaa.net/ QROD(RE IN FORCE + Die_Feen + ふにふに。 + Quatrefoil) ㌍メイト [RE IN FORCE] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/panda1106/ ジョン・コナー [Quatrefoil] ttp //f56.aaa.livedoor.jp/~henrique ｸｲﾝたん [Quatrefoil] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/asagiri1100/ SWATS(SeaLoungeGarden + WildCard + Per aspera ad astra + ＴＩＦＦ∀ＮＹ + Satisfaction) 玲瓏 [SeaLoungeGarden] ttp //air.ap.teacup.com/0717/ Fantasista [SeaLoungeGarden] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/blacklist0530 スノゥ [ＴＩＦＦ∀ＮＹ] ttp //www2.tba.t-com.ne.jp/slateblue nibaru [ＴＩＦＦ∀ＮＹ] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/nibaru-k/ Trueno [satisfaction] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/olive_village/ †クリストゥ† [WildCard] ttp //criss0810.blog16.fc2.com/ JEkyllY [Satisfaction] ttp //jekyll-style.com/weblog/ 赤猫MC(A.C.E. + 壁際賊 + Le-Chat + MOET CHANDON) アサキ [壁際賊] ttp //www.digipop.ne.jp/~grenier estera [壁際賊] ttp //tk4.dyndns.org/~estera hiero2 [MOET CHANDON] ttp //hielog.blog13.fc2.com/ クレ [MOET CHANDON] ttp //krypton.jp.land.to/ro/ †ゆたかん† [MOET CHANDON] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/yutakan1/ ラスィ [MOET CHANDON] ttp //risfiele.blog8.fc2.com/ Cartis [MOET CHANDON] ttp //nagoya.cool.ne.jp/sleuf/main.htm ぽりん(ぽりんぴーす + Try-Tone + 聖刻騎士団) 嘘カナカナ [Try-Tone] http //blog.drecom.jp/datennshi/ レビーナ [ぽりんぴーす] http //rebi.exblog.jp/ 麻雀(激談死期 + dustbox + 倭寇) ZiNtEi [倭寇] ttp //www.doblog.com/weblog/myblog/30114 せしる。 [激談死期] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/cecile7050 Ravoud [dustbox] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/ravoud/ 他 psyche [Crociata] ttp //amrita.candypop.jp/crociata/ masagami [Crociata] ttp //rolog.blog12.fc2.com/ Nebula_ [Crociata] ttp //shirayuki.saiin.net/~kosmos/ Snowscape [Crociata] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/bringash/ ソノラ ttp //sacrament-dream.web.infoseek.co.jp/ †空音† ttp //blog4.fc2.com/vividheart/ さくらそう ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/sakurasou0000/ ビシャモン ttp //blog.drecom.jp/daigoroucz/ さんだ ttp //thunder.netgamers.jp/ng/ 霧野 小春 ttp //hatokoso.hp.infoseek.co.jp/ Liber ttp //lowe.seesaa.net/ Fallenangel Rusifell [RAVENS] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/lsifell *Soon* [RAVENS] ttp //trapnest.jugem.cc 阿蒙 ttp //www.geocities.jp/hakuyaku_kyou 蒼天の光戦記 ttp //soutenn.fc2web.com/ Gold Fox [飛べない鳥] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/bad_kind/ あすぱら [Infinity Fantasy] ttp //renanan.exblog.jp/ 雫菜 [Lead] ttp //hokoli.exblog.jp/ けんじどん [クロマティ高校] ttp //curuhome.cururu.jp/bakko Mint_aug [クロマティ高校] ttp //blog2.fc2.com/aug -ぁぃ- [クロマティ高校] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/lovetide ジュドー [クロマティ高校] ttp //pgr305.exblog.jp フリージア [クロマティ高校] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/pentacle/ 柚胡 [クロマティ高校] ttp //caifa.blog21.fc2.com/ suissa [Emerald Garden Fete] ttp //blog.livedoor.jp/suissa/ 絆奈 [Emerald Garden Fete] ttp //smaragdos.blog19.fc2.com/ ☆暗光 りゅみ☆ [Emerald Garden Fete] ttp //urawa.cool.ne.jp/lumi-ec/ ウミゥ [Erotic LIP] ttp //www.geocities.jp/ore_cat/ killin [DIABOLOS] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/ro-uwanosora/ みまっち [聖魔装隊] ttp //mimatetsu.fc2web.com ミクトラン ttp //mikutoran.exblog.jp rained ttp //yaplog.jp/raineddd/ Hina"Angel" [一匹狼] ttp //yaplog.jp/infinite-hina/ 瑞樹 佳枝 [一匹狼] ttp //ten59.holybell.to/kaekae/ 衛 [一匹狼] ttp //yaplog.jp/mamomamorun/ neos [Rag-Time] ttp //neos.blog12.fc2.com/ Annerose [夜間非行隊] ttp //blog.drecom.jp/grunewald/ † えんじぇりんぐ † [┃┃¨╋┓] ttp //chikara0822.blog8.fc2.com/ ∮沙 紗∮ [┃┃¨╋┓] ttp //sasyasya777.blog8.fc2.com/ -Fif- [†Bloody Mary Soldier†] ttp //www.usamimi.info/~fiftteta/
https://w.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/pages/5307.html
【登録タグ D DiGiTAL WiNG RAVER’S NEST 5 TOHO RAVE PARTY peЯco. 二色蓮花蝶 ～ Ancients】 【注意】 現在、このページはJavaScriptの利用が一時制限されています。この表示状態ではトラック情報が正しく表示されません。 この問題は、以下のいずれかが原因となっています。 ページがAMP表示となっている ウィキ内検索からページを表示している これを解決するには、こちらをクリックし、ページを通常表示にしてください。 /** General styling **/ @font-face { font-family Noto Sans JP ; font-display swap; font-style normal; font-weight 350; src url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/10/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.woff2) format( woff2 ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/9/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.woff) format( woff ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/8/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.ttf) format( truetype ); } @font-face { font-family Noto Sans JP ; font-display swap; font-style normal; font-weight bold; src url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/13/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.woff2) format( woff2 ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/12/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.woff) format( woff ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/11/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.ttf) format( truetype ); } rt { font-family Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; } /** Main table styling **/ #trackinfo, #lyrics { font-family Noto Sans JP , sans-serif; font-weight 350; } .track_number { font-family Rockwell; font-weight bold; } .track_number after { content . ; } #track_args, .amp_text { display none; } #trackinfo { position relative; float right; margin 0 0 1em 1em; padding 0.3em; width 320px; border-collapse separate; border-radius 5px; border-spacing 0; background-color #F9F9F9; font-size 90%; line-height 1.4em; } #trackinfo th { white-space nowrap; } #trackinfo th, #trackinfo td { border none !important; } #trackinfo thead th { background-color #D8D8D8; box-shadow 0 -3px #F9F9F9 inset; padding 4px 2.5em 7px; white-space normal; font-size 120%; text-align center; } .trackrow { background-color #F0F0F0; box-shadow 0 2px #F9F9F9 inset, 0 -2px #F9F9F9 inset; } #trackinfo td ul { margin 0; padding 0; list-style none; } #trackinfo li { line-height 16px; } #trackinfo li nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 6px; } #trackinfo dl { margin 0; } #trackinfo dt { font-size small; font-weight bold; } #trackinfo dd { margin-left 1.2em; } #trackinfo dd + dt { margin-top .5em; } #trackinfo_help { position absolute; top 3px; right 8px; font-size 80%; } /** Media styling **/ #trackinfo .media th { background-color #D8D8D8; padding 4px 0; font-size 95%; text-align center; } .media td { padding 0 2px; } .media iframe nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 0.3em; } .youtube + .nicovideo, .youtube + .soundcloud, .nicovideo + .soundcloud { margin-top 0.75em; } .media_section { display flex; align-items center; text-align center; } .media_section before, .media_section after { display block; flex-grow 1; content ; height 1px; } .media_section before { margin-right 0.5em; background linear-gradient(-90deg, #888, transparent); } .media_section after { margin-left 0.5em; background linear-gradient(90deg, #888, transparent); } .media_notice { color firebrick; font-size 77.5%; } /** Around track styling **/ .next-track { float right; } /** Infomation styling **/ #trackinfo .info_header th { padding .3em .5em; background-color #D8D8D8; font-size 95%; } #trackinfo .infomation_show_btn_wrapper { float right; font-size 12px; user-select none; } #trackinfo .infomation_show_btn { cursor pointer; } #trackinfo .info_content td { padding 0 0 0 5px; height 0; transition .3s; } #trackinfo .info_content ul { padding 0; margin 0; max-height 0; list-style initial; transition .3s; } #trackinfo .info_content li { opacity 0; visibility hidden; margin 0 0 0 1.5em; transition .3s, opacity .2s; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show td { padding 5px; height 100%; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show ul { padding 5px 0; max-height 50em; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show li { opacity 1; visibility visible; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show li nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 10px; } /** Lyrics styling **/ #lyrics { font-size 1.06em; line-height 1.6em; } .not_in_card, .inaudible { display inline; position relative; } .not_in_card { border-bottom dashed 1px #D0D0D0; } .tooltip { display flex; visibility hidden; position absolute; top -42.5px; left 0; width 275px; min-height 20px; max-height 100px; padding 10px; border-radius 5px; background-color #555; align-items center; color #FFF; font-size 85%; line-height 20px; text-align center; white-space nowrap; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; -webkit-user-select none; -moz-user-select none; -ms-user-select none; user-select none; } .inaudible .tooltip { top -68.5px; } span hover + .tooltip { visibility visible; top -47.5px; opacity 0.8; transition 0.3s; } .inaudible span hover + .tooltip { top -73.5px; } .not_in_card span.hide { top -42.5px; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } .inaudible .img { display inline-block; width 3.45em; height 1.25em; margin-right 4px; margin-bottom -3.5px; margin-left 4px; background-image url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2971/7/Inaudible.png); background-size contain; background-repeat no-repeat; } .not_in_card after, .inaudible .img after { content ; visibility hidden; position absolute; top -8.5px; left 42.5%; border-width 5px; border-style solid; border-color #555 transparent transparent transparent; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } .not_in_card hover after, .inaudible .img hover after { content ; visibility visible; top -13.5px; left 42.5%; opacity 0.8; transition 0.3s; } .not_in_card after { top -2.5px; left 50%; } .not_in_card hover after { top -7.5px; left 50%; } .not_in_card.hide after { visibility hidden; top -2.5px; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } /** For mobile device styling **/ .uk-overflow-container { display inline; } #trackinfo.mobile { display table; float none; width 100%; margin auto; margin-bottom 1em; } #trackinfo.mobile th { text-transform none; } #trackinfo.mobile tbody tr not(.media) th { text-align left; background-color unset; } #trackinfo.mobile td { white-space normal; } document.addEventListener( DOMContentLoaded , function() { use strict ; const headers = { title アルバム別曲名 , album アルバム , circle サークル , vocal Vocal , lyric Lyric , chorus Chorus , narrator Narration , rap Rap , voice Voice , whistle Whistle (口笛) , translate Translation (翻訳) , arrange Arrange , artist Artist , bass Bass , cajon Cajon (カホン) , drum Drum , guitar Guitar , keyboard Keyboard , mc MC , mix Mix , piano Piano , sax Sax , strings Strings , synthesizer Synthesizer , trumpet Trumpet , violin Violin , original 原曲 , image_song イメージ曲 }; const rPagename = /(?=^|.*
https://w.atwiki.jp/vocaloidenglishlyric/pages/79.html
【Tags N rose tN yuukiss Meiko】 Original Music Title Nostalogic Music written, Voice edited by yuukiss Lyrics written by yuukiss / rose Singer Meiko Fanmade Promotional Video(s) Click here for the Japanese Lyrics (radio edit) Click here for the Japanese Lyrics (single edit) English Lyrics (translated by motokokusanagi2009)： （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Uh Yeah A-ha…） （Fuh Ooh…） Cheerful voices pass across out of the blue Passed days were left with "0" and "1" What s breaking my heart? Relinquishment? Or nostalogic...? Allured by the flickering light, I go round and round in the past only to come to myself All what comes in my sight is The same future I imagined with you The immature song that disappeared afar Has definitely stayed fascinating Still I can hear it Still I can hear it （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Uh Yeah A-ha…） （Fuh Ooh…） Time passes as it is I was staring at it like chess pieces The waning light is My goal? Or nostalogic...? Paying little attention to flying wings, I run around in circles only to increase impatience The days we talked about "hopes and chances" I yearn for them The beginning place I looked far ahead Is the definite existence That is supporting me That is supporting me （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Nostalogic...） （Nostalogic...） Keep your eyes closed till the sun rises And count sheep and regret I know I can t turn back more than enough Even so, I m not gonna give up my ideals The immature song that disappeared afar Has definitely stayed fascinating Still I can hear it The far destination we set out hasn t changed at all Breathlessly, Am I still trying to reach there? Are you still trying to reach there...? （La La La La Ha-aah…） Romaji lyrics (transliterated by motokokusanagi2009)： （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Uh Yeah A-ha…） （Fuh Ooh…） fui ni yogiru hashagi goe "zero" to "ichi" de noko sareta Passed days mune o tsuku itami no wake wa akirame? sore tomo Nostalogic...? matataku hikari ni sasoware kako o tadori meguri ware ni kaeri me no mae ni hirogaru keshiki wa kimi to mita mirai to onaji tōku ni kieta rakugaki no uta kitto iro ase naide ima mo boku ni kikoe teru ima mo boku ni kikoe teru （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Uh Yeah A-ha…） （Fuh Ooh…） mui ni sugiru jikan dake onaji ichi de nagame teta Like chess pieces usure yuku kagayaki sore wa mokuteki? sore tomo Nostalogic...? habataku tsubasa o yokome ni kara mawari bakari aseri tsunori katari atta "kibō + kanōsei" ano hibi ga tada koishī tōku mi sueta hajimari no basho kitto tada sore dake ga ima no boku o sasae teru ima no boku o sasae teru （M-E-I-K-O M-E-I-K-O…） （Nostalogic...） （Nostalogic...） asa ga kuru made me o tojite soshite hitsuji to kōkai o kazoeru no modore nai koto gurai wakatteru kedo demo dakedo risō wa sutezu ni tōku ni kieta rakugaki no uta kitto iro ase naide ima mo boku ni kikoe teru tōku mezashita yakusoku no basho zutto iki hazumasete ima mo boku wa mezashi teru ima mo kimi wa mezashi teru...? （La La La La Ha-aah…）
https://w.atwiki.jp/darwinian/pages/16.html
Protologic 68000 - 悲運のゲーム機にしてDarwiniaの母体 1986年、Protologic EntertainmentのDr. Sepulvedaは最高傑作のゲーム機を発売しようとした。そのゲーム機Protologic 68000は革新的なものではあったが、ローンチ直前に技術的な欠陥が見つかり、メディアのネガティブキャンペーンにより50000台の予約は全てキャンセルされてしまった。ローンチは歴史的失敗となり、会社は破産。Dr. Sepulvedaは在庫となった50000台を抱えることになった。 もはや失うものもないDr. SepulvedaはこれらのProtologic 68000で実験するうちにその隠された性質に気づくことになる。初期ロットのProtologic 68000には隣接したマシンが量子的に同調するという奇妙な癖があったのだ。このHyperprocessing現象によりマシンを加えるほど計算能力は劇的に増加することがわかった。 Dr. Sepulvedaはなけなしのお金を使ってDarwin Research Associatesを設立し、Protologic 68000によるグリッドコンピューティングシステムを作り上げた。そしてスーパーコンピューターより人間の脳に近いこのグリッドシステムでデジタル生命の研究を開始した。こうして進化するデジタル世界Darwinia、そしてその住人であるDarwinianが生まれることになった。
https://w.atwiki.jp/vocaloidenglishlyric/pages/124.html
【Tags A Deco*27 Miku tL tW】 Original Music Title 愛言葉 Love Words \ Words of Love (Ai Kotoba) Music Lyrics written, Voice edited by Deco*27 Music arranged by Deco*27 Singer 初音ミク (Hatsune Miku) Click here for the Japanese Lyrics English Lyrics (translated by haru47)： It seems that you always take care of my child I thank you, thank you for listening to my songs Before I forget what you did for me in my life With the feeling I hid inside I put it into a song Words of love are "Ten love = Thank you" Something about me, or you, or romance, or love Or to like, or to dislike I ll sing about them again I love you now I mean, I love you Rather, I love you You like me and love me, Though I m so stupid You cried for listening the song like this Thank you for that. Thank you for celebrating my child On her 100000th birthday Within this limited time in my life By putting it into music and lyrics I ll create and send it to you Please take care of them as well in the future Something about me, or you, or romance, or love Or to like, or to dislike Still not enough? LOL Then, "What did you eat yesterday?" "What were you doing?" "How many times did you think about me?" Let s talk about something like this! "I ate YOU" ... stupid. "I did IT" ... stupid. "I totally forgot someone like you" ... stupid. I like you As I said so, that s a lie LOL In fact, I love you I don t want to hurt you But I like you I love you all the day long I want to say, "I remember this song" And laugh with you You are someone like me I m someone like you We re alike but different We re alike because different Every time I tell you that I like you My feeling of "I like you" grows That s a plenty of ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ Words of love from me to you Romaji lyrics (transliterated by haru47)： itsumo boku no kodomo ga osewa ni natte iru you de kii te kure ta anata gata ni kansha, kansha. kono goon wo isshou de wasure nai uchi ni uchi ni hime ta omoi to tom ni uta ni shi te mimashi ta. ai kotoba wa "ai ga too = arigatou" boku toka kimi toka koi toka ai toka suki toka kirai toka mata utau ne. ima kimi ga suki de teka kimi ga suki de mushiro kimi ga suki de konna baka na boku wo kimi wa suki de aishi te kur ete. konna uta kii te nai te kure te arigatou. itsuka boku no kodomo ga juuman sai no tanjoubi mukae ta toki, iwattekurete sanjuuku mashita kono goon wa isshou de kagirare ta jikan de umareru kyoku to shi ni nose te kimi ni todokeru yo korekara mo douka yoroshiku ne boku toka kimi toka koi toka ai toka suki toka kirai toka mada tari nai? jaa "kinou nani tabeta?" "nani shiteta?" "nankai boku no koto omoidashita?" konna koto hanashitemiyou ka! "kimi tabeta." ...baka. "nani shiteta." ...baka. "kimi no koto nanka wasurechatta yo." ...baka. kimi ga suki de tte iu no wa uso de honto wa daisuki de. kizutsuke taku naku te demo kimi ga suki de aishi te kure te "konna uta atta ne" tte kimi to warai tai n da (boku mitai na kimi kimi mitai na boku niteru kedo chigatte chigatteru kara niteru suki da yo toiu tabi ni fueru suki no kimochi wa boku kara takusan no kimi e no) ai kotoba
https://w.atwiki.jp/clickweapon/pages/14.html
Polish songs List Polish National Anthem "Mazurek Dąbrowskiego" ★ http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=2nmFHUbVQtA KOMBI - Słodkiego Miłego Życia (Sweet Cheerful Life or sth like this) ★ http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=ovhzZnaAl5A http //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kombi_%28band%29 T.Love - Chłopaki nie płaczą (Boys don t cry) http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=MMiIZPE7lqs http //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.Love T.love - Polish Boyfriend http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeLu4E8ukw T.Love - Warszawa ★ http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=24AxrgT79vA T.LOVE - Jest super http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_LPh8v-ywo ELEKTRYCZNE GITARY - Co ty tutaj robisz ★ http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=j6TrCAw0x5c Edyta Gorniak. http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZqkXXkgBxY http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXmcCj3kX44 Olga Szomanska, Przemyslaw Branny, Piotr Rubik i Oratorium T http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=-Q6Pj2d_pO4 Piotr Rubik - To cala prawda http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=taN2FZZbXmM latest hits "Psalm dla Ciebie" TOP TRENDY 2007 http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=LEhoGxCYDPQ "Niech mówią, że to nie jest miłość" TOP TRENDY 2007 http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=4GH4cISCp6w Doda - Katharsis Top Trendy 2007 http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=gJwSqkuKlNc Doda - Szansa (Top Trendy) http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=cKVdKw4HPaU Niemen http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzACDJCfQvs http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1bdMhrvh20 Czerwone gitary http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-YGThDOkgE http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTzEMTC-_d0 Ewa Bem http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZqsI9W6ONI Lady Pank - Marchewkowe pole http //raphal.wrzuta.pl/audio/8YubiB0t99/lady_pank_-_marchewkowe_pole Stanisław Soyka - Cud niepamięci http //www.wrzuta.pl/audio/mZon8QpmQ1/stanislaw_soyka_-_cud_niepamieci http //pshemeck.wrzuta.pl/audio/a6mluUm5SO/18_czas_nas_uczy_pogody Aga Zaryan - Throw It Away (女性ボーカル、おされ) http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LB6f8z_cpY Coma - Leszek Zukowski（男性ボーカル）★ http //www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8yz5la6PG4 Behemoth (Death Metal) http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=38j-i8jH7xk http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=Oey85FGHOHc polo s List and ... 70,80 Psio Crew http //jp.youtube.com/watch?v=L1d2mg421G0 raz dwa trzy http //jp.www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTZbM4dJLkc http //jp.www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVFlifDxV80 - original by Wojciech 1 czeslaw niemen i partia - pod papugami 2 maryla rodowicz - malgoska 3 skaldowie przesliczna - wiolonczelistka 4 magda umer - koncert jesienny na dwa swierszcze i wiatr w kominie 5 czerwone gitary - nie spoczniemy 6 krystyna pronko - niech moje serce kolysze cie do snu 7 krzysztof klenczon i trzy korony - 10 w skali beauforta 8 elzbieta wojnowska i alibabki - zaproscie mnie do stolu 9 boguslaw mec - jej portret 10 anna jantar i alibabki - tyle slonca w calym miescie 11 brekout - poszlabym za toba 12 danuta rinn - gdzie ci mezczyzni 13 vox - bananowy song 14 alicja majewska - jeszcze sie tam zagiel bieli 15 2+1 - isc w strone slonca 16 krzysztof krawczyk - pamietam ciebie z tamtych lat 17 zdzislawa sosnicka - julia i ja 18 andrzej rosiewicz - najwiecej witaminy 70` martynkaa.wrzuta.pl/audio/dmkYih6Rgb/skaldowie_-_wszystko_mi_mowi_ze_mnie_ktos_pokochal Dzień Jeden w Roku - Seweryn Krajewski Niebo z Moich Stron - Czerwone Gitary Była To Głupia Miłość - Czerwone Gitary Nie Spoczniemy - Czerwone Gitary Prześliczna Wiolonczelistka - Skaldowie Medytacje Wiejskiego... - Skaldowie Wiosna - Skaldowie Życzenia z Całego Serca - Skaldowie Wierniejsza od Marzenia - Skaldowie Z Kopyta Kulig Rwie - Skaldowie Windą do Nieba - Dwa Plus Jeden Do Łezki Łezka - Maryla Rodowicz Małgośka Szkoda Łez - Maryla Rodowicz Znamy Się Tylko... - Trubadurzy Rysunek na Szkle - K. Krawczyk Parostatek - K. Krawczyk Dni, Których Nie Znamy - Marek Grechuta Koncert Jesienny... - Magda Umer Anna- Blackout Jej Portret- Bogusław Mec Przetańczyć z Tobą Chcę...- Anna Jantar Tyle Słońca w Całym Mieście- Anna Jantar Do Zakochania Jeden Krok- Andrzej Dąbrowski Dwadzieścia Lat- Jacek Lech Jak Się Masz Kochanie- Happy End 80` kaasiaa83.wrzuta.pl/audio/gJsoa8iy1l/lombard_-_przezyj_to_sam Autobiografia - Perfect Niewiele Ci Mogę Dać - Perfekt Nie Płacz Ewka - Perfect Co Mi Panie Dasz - Bajm Biała Armia - Bajm Skóra - AyaRL Słodkiego Miłego Życia - Kombi Nasze Randez vous - Kombi Naj Story - Papa Dance Daj Mi Tę Noc - Bolter Mniej Niż Zero - Lady Pank Na Co Komu Dziś - Lady Pank Zawsze Tam Gdzie Ty - Lady Pank Zamki Na Piasku - Lady Pank Tin Pan Alley - Halina Frąckowiak Małe Tęsknoty - Krystyna Prońko Za Ostatni Grosz - Budka Suflera Jolka Jolka Pamiętasz - Budka Suflera Przeżyj To Sam - Lombard Ostatni Taniec - Lombard Wokół Sami Lunatycy - Dżem Szczęśliwej Drogi Już Czas - Vox Malinowy Król - Urszula Chłopcy Radarowcy - Andrzej Rosiewicz Och Ziuta - Ireneusz Dudek Czarny Ali Baba - Andrzej Zaucha Gdzie Się Podziały Tamte... - Wojciech Gąssowski Monika - Wały Jagiellońskie Kocham Cię, Kochanie Moje - Maanam Kiedy Byłem Małym Chłopcem - Breackout 90` List do M - Dżem fotuga.wrzuta.pl/audio/eFzpqSIkzZ/dzem_-_list_do_m fotuga.wrzuta.pl/audio/dzMpCj9GU9/dzem_-_harley_moj Jestem z Miasta - Elektryczne Gitary Nie Pij Piotrek - Elektryczne Gitary Co Ty Tutaj Robisz - Elektryczne Gitary Ona Jest Pedałem - Elektryczne Gitary Chłopaki Nie Płaczą - T. Love Pocałuj Noc - Varius Manx Zanim Zrozumiesz - Varius Manx Orła Cień - Varius Manx Piosenka Księżycowa - Varius Manx Małe Szczęścia - Robert Jason I Wszystko Się Może Zdarzyć - Anita Lipnicka Zamigotał Świat - Anita Lipnicka Takie Tango - Budka Suflera Strefa Półcienia - Budka Suflera Bez Aplauzu - Budka Suflera Jeden Raz - Budka Suflera Na Językach - Kayah Oprócz - Golden Life Kocham Cię - Chłopcy z Placu Broni Kochać Inaczej - De Mono Znów Jesteś Ze Mną - De Mono Statki Na Niebie - De Mono Kamień i Aksamit - De Mono J Love You Do Bólu - Robert Chojnacki Niecierpliwi - Robert Chojnacki Prawie Do Nieba - Robert Chojnacki Budzikom Śmierć - Robert Chojnacki Anioł - Maanam Wyjątkowo Zimny Maj - Maanam Zaopiekuj Się Mną - Rezerwat Imię Deszczu - Mafia Mocniej - Andrzej Piaseczny Jestem Kobietą - Edyta Górniak To Nie Ja - Edyta Górniak Konik Na Biegunach - Urszula Na Sen - Urszula Ja Płaczę - Urszula W Biegu - Natalia Kukulska Wypijmy Za Błędy - R. Rynkowski Makumba ska - Big Cyc Szalała, Szalała - Krywań Lato - Formacja NS Mogę Wszystko - LO 27 vipper29 - nope, covers with funny text Latest song - static.psiocrew.pl/mp3/Psio%20Crew%20-%20Hajduk.mp3 www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1d2mg421G0 Polish song that almost all Polish knows david130.wrzuta.pl/audio/1vq5fQiab3/czerwone_gitary_-_ktos_mnie_pokochal 80` andante.wrzuta.pl/audio/zc8Vx787qN/urszula_-_malinowy_krol blitz.wrzuta.pl/audio/jIBcfP4FbV/malgorzata_ostrowska_-_szklana_pogoda polish songs, old, new... 24h http //polskastacja.pl/play/aac_tpp.pls aac+ http //polskastacja.pl/play/aac_pnp.pls aac+ old leciu71.wrzuta.pl/audio/gTJwMhbF9T/rezerwat_-_zaopiekuj_sie_mna new jowitka007.wrzuta.pl/audio/5jrEUEgRjS/verba_rezerwat-zaopiekuj_sie_mna Marek Grechuta - Zegarmistrz swiatla www.wrzuta.pl/audio/1EiVH1OLkk/marek_grechuta_-_zegarmistrz_swiatla Marek Grechuta - Nie dokazuj andante.wrzuta.pl/audio/1t5IIYbRnZ/nie_dokazuj_-_marek_grechuta old Marek Grechuta Anawa - Dni Ktorych Nie Znamy marlena92.wrzuta.pl/audio/dCAcnwMN19/marek_grechuta_anawa_-_dni_ktorych_nie_znamy new Grachuta marlena92.wrzuta.pl/audio/dCAcnwMN19/marek_grechuta_anawa_-_dni_ktorych_nie_znamy Shakin Dudi - mam Dwie Lewe Ręce www.wrzuta.pl/audio/vlrUQAkvwQ/shakin_dudi_-_mam_dwie_lewe_rece Grzegorz Turnau, Rynkowski, Pod Budą and maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnny maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnny ... lol KUKIZ ;) uzytkownik.wrzuta.pl/film/rwyIACt6Pl/o_hela_-_pawel_kukiz krzysiek2507.wrzuta.pl/film/41PhNh5BCM/borysewicz_kukiz_-_jesli_tylko_chcesz majka1304.wrzuta.pl/audio/1LSyDd0pM2/borysewicz_i_kukiz_-_jest_taki_dzien tarsycjusz.wrzuta.pl/audio/2BlnHOeTFq/yugopolis_i_pawel_kukiz_-_miasto_budzi_sie madzialena1625.wrzuta.pl/audio/xeOqk6wihK/kukiz-o_nic_nie_pytaj www.wrzuta.pl/audio/8TMZKvJGYR/pawel_kukiz_i_piersi_-_mietek_zul kedzior18.wrzuta.pl/audio/ykkYvwPj09/kukiz_i_piersi_-_wirus_sld wiedom.wrzuta.pl/audio/o02X0MoC8r/piersi_i_kukiz_-_oszukalas_mnie... pozytywny.wrzuta.pl/audio/tidw4pD6ZX/kukiz_i_piersi_-_rezerwa polo 29-08-2007 1 00 Wątki 658 Odpowiedzi 30580 buahhahahah to dosram i ja, niech bedzie z jajem www.wrzuta.pl/audio/vq5B9whfwt/marek_kondrat_-_mydelko_fa karramba - www.wrzuta.pl/audio/2baE2lCoDu/pocaluj_mnie_w_dupe [juz widze jak sie przy tym gibia lol] szczypior21.wrzuta.pl/audio/8Mxl9BAgfO/nowosc_verba_-_zycie_30_pazdziernika_2006 szczypior21.wrzuta.pl/audio/jP0rQl6Agc/mezo_kasia_wilk_-_sacrum_lepsza_jakosc and polish jean michael jarre karino.wrzuta.pl/audio/7peK2GW1M8/marek_bilinski_-_ucieczka_z_tropiku marcinagent007.wrzuta.pl/audio/rCvrGW9hpe/marek_bilinski_-_kapitan_nemo drivermsg.wrzuta.pl/audio/bYURrEtAg9/marek_bilinski_-_dom_w_dolinie_mgiel drivermsg.wrzuta.pl/audio/lHanidjoCJ/marek_bylinski_-_porachunki_z_blizniakami
https://w.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/pages/6297.html
【登録タグ CYTOKINE I ZYTOKINE aki リバースイデオロギー 曲 東方幻奏響UROBOROS肆 ～dEATHtINYoVERdRIVE～】 【注意】 現在、このページはJavaScriptの利用が一時制限されています。この表示状態ではトラック情報が正しく表示されません。 この問題は、以下のいずれかが原因となっています。 ページがAMP表示となっている ウィキ内検索からページを表示している これを解決するには、こちらをクリックし、ページを通常表示にしてください。 /** General styling **/ @font-face { font-family Noto Sans JP ; font-display swap; font-style normal; font-weight 350; src url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/10/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.woff2) format( woff2 ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/9/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.woff) format( woff ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/8/NotoSansCJKjp-DemiLight.ttf) format( truetype ); } @font-face { font-family Noto Sans JP ; font-display swap; font-style normal; font-weight bold; src url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/13/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.woff2) format( woff2 ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/12/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.woff) format( woff ), url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2972/11/NotoSansCJKjp-Medium.ttf) format( truetype ); } rt { font-family Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; } /** Main table styling **/ #trackinfo, #lyrics { font-family Noto Sans JP , sans-serif; font-weight 350; } .track_number { font-family Rockwell; font-weight bold; } .track_number after { content . ; } #track_args, .amp_text { display none; } #trackinfo { position relative; float right; margin 0 0 1em 1em; padding 0.3em; width 320px; border-collapse separate; border-radius 5px; border-spacing 0; background-color #F9F9F9; font-size 90%; line-height 1.4em; } #trackinfo th { white-space nowrap; } #trackinfo th, #trackinfo td { border none !important; } #trackinfo thead th { background-color #D8D8D8; box-shadow 0 -3px #F9F9F9 inset; padding 4px 2.5em 7px; white-space normal; font-size 120%; text-align center; } .trackrow { background-color #F0F0F0; box-shadow 0 2px #F9F9F9 inset, 0 -2px #F9F9F9 inset; } #trackinfo td ul { margin 0; padding 0; list-style none; } #trackinfo li { line-height 16px; } #trackinfo li nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 6px; } #trackinfo dl { margin 0; } #trackinfo dt { font-size small; font-weight bold; } #trackinfo dd { margin-left 1.2em; } #trackinfo dd + dt { margin-top .5em; } #trackinfo_help { position absolute; top 3px; right 8px; font-size 80%; } /** Media styling **/ #trackinfo .media th { background-color #D8D8D8; padding 4px 0; font-size 95%; text-align center; } .media td { padding 0 2px; } .media iframe nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 0.3em; } .youtube + .nicovideo, .youtube + .soundcloud, .nicovideo + .soundcloud { margin-top 0.75em; } .media_section { display flex; align-items center; text-align center; } .media_section before, .media_section after { display block; flex-grow 1; content ; height 1px; } .media_section before { margin-right 0.5em; background linear-gradient(-90deg, #888, transparent); } .media_section after { margin-left 0.5em; background linear-gradient(90deg, #888, transparent); } .media_notice { color firebrick; font-size 77.5%; } /** Around track styling **/ .next-track { float right; } /** Infomation styling **/ #trackinfo .info_header th { padding .3em .5em; background-color #D8D8D8; font-size 95%; } #trackinfo .infomation_show_btn_wrapper { float right; font-size 12px; user-select none; } #trackinfo .infomation_show_btn { cursor pointer; } #trackinfo .info_content td { padding 0 0 0 5px; height 0; transition .3s; } #trackinfo .info_content ul { padding 0; margin 0; max-height 0; list-style initial; transition .3s; } #trackinfo .info_content li { opacity 0; visibility hidden; margin 0 0 0 1.5em; transition .3s, opacity .2s; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show td { padding 5px; height 100%; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show ul { padding 5px 0; max-height 50em; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show li { opacity 1; visibility visible; } #trackinfo .info_content.infomation_show li nth-of-type(n+2) { margin-top 10px; } /** Lyrics styling **/ #lyrics { font-size 1.06em; line-height 1.6em; } .not_in_card, .inaudible { display inline; position relative; } .not_in_card { border-bottom dashed 1px #D0D0D0; } .tooltip { display flex; visibility hidden; position absolute; top -42.5px; left 0; width 275px; min-height 20px; max-height 100px; padding 10px; border-radius 5px; background-color #555; align-items center; color #FFF; font-size 85%; line-height 20px; text-align center; white-space nowrap; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; -webkit-user-select none; -moz-user-select none; -ms-user-select none; user-select none; } .inaudible .tooltip { top -68.5px; } span hover + .tooltip { visibility visible; top -47.5px; opacity 0.8; transition 0.3s; } .inaudible span hover + .tooltip { top -73.5px; } .not_in_card span.hide { top -42.5px; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } .inaudible .img { display inline-block; width 3.45em; height 1.25em; margin-right 4px; margin-bottom -3.5px; margin-left 4px; background-image url(https //img.atwikiimg.com/www31.atwiki.jp/touhoukashi/attach/2971/7/Inaudible.png); background-size contain; background-repeat no-repeat; } .not_in_card after, .inaudible .img after { content ; visibility hidden; position absolute; top -8.5px; left 42.5%; border-width 5px; border-style solid; border-color #555 transparent transparent transparent; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } .not_in_card hover after, .inaudible .img hover after { content ; visibility visible; top -13.5px; left 42.5%; opacity 0.8; transition 0.3s; } .not_in_card after { top -2.5px; left 50%; } .not_in_card hover after { top -7.5px; left 50%; } .not_in_card.hide after { visibility hidden; top -2.5px; opacity 0; transition 0.7s; } /** For mobile device styling **/ .uk-overflow-container { display inline; } #trackinfo.mobile { display table; float none; width 100%; margin auto; margin-bottom 1em; } #trackinfo.mobile th { text-transform none; } #trackinfo.mobile tbody tr not(.media) th { text-align left; background-color unset; } #trackinfo.mobile td { white-space normal; } document.addEventListener( DOMContentLoaded , function() { use strict ; const headers = { title アルバム別曲名 , album アルバム , circle サークル , vocal Vocal , lyric Lyric , chorus Chorus , narrator Narration , rap Rap , voice Voice , whistle Whistle (口笛) , translate Translation (翻訳) , arrange Arrange , artist Artist , bass Bass , cajon Cajon (カホン) , drum Drum , guitar Guitar , keyboard Keyboard , mc MC , mix Mix , piano Piano , sax Sax , strings Strings , synthesizer Synthesizer , trumpet Trumpet , violin Violin , original 原曲 , image_song イメージ曲 }; const rPagename = /(?=^|.*
https://w.atwiki.jp/japanesehiphop/pages/993.html
・A.K.A. BEAT LEGEND BL SPYDER CHEETAH TRACKS H.TEFLON 鋼田テフロン BACHLOGIC HAYABUSA ・ANALOG [WORKS] 2002 W.H. MEGA BURNIN'／TOUGH LIKE A HUMMER - DOBERMAN INC JAM SESSION／D.TO THE INC／MEGA HIP HOP - DOBERMAN INC 2003 ANOTHER WORLD REMIX - MINMI 2006 花と雨 REMIX - SEEDA THE THREE 16'S(THE RETURN) - ZEEBRA 2007 煙玉 - SEEDA 2008 EXIT REMIXES - NORIKIYO OUTLET BLUES EP - NORIKIYO RIVAXIDE EP - NORIKIYO 2009 人間交差点～風の街～ - SD JUNKSTA 2010 ONCE AGAIN EP - RHYMESTER BREATHE EP - SEEDA 2011 あの丘 - t-Ace 秘密 - NORIKIYO 2012 今 - KYN IN MY SHOES - SALU THE PACKAGE - AKLO RED PILL REMIX - AKLO STAND HARD REMIX - SALU 2013 BUNKS MARMALADE - SWANKY SWIPE REBUILD - BES 2014 THE R～THE BEST OF RHYMESTER 2009-2014～ - RHYMESTER 東京弐拾伍時 - V.A. 2015 I REP - V.A. LUCIFER'S OUT - 東京弐拾伍時 BITTER, SWEET BEAUTIFUL - RHYMESTER 時間ヨ止マレ - 東京弐拾伍時 コンドル - サイプレス上野とロベルト吉野 2016 RGTO - AKLO 2017 BABE - JJJ EXIT - NORIKIYO DIFFERENT MAN - AKLO×JAY'ED ダンサブル - RHYMESTER 2019 SOLIPSISM - VIGORMAN PAUSE - WILYWNKA Natural Born Pain／19 - Kvi Baba THE ALBUM - SCARS NEXT EPISODE - SCARS 2020 花と雨 - SEEDA TOKYO 25 00 - 東京弐拾伍時 2021 新小岩 - ZORN トラボルタカスタム - 梅田サイファー
https://w.atwiki.jp/jikkyosha_ust/pages/401.html
Logical positivism and logical empiricism, which together formed neopositivism, was a movement in Western philosophy that embraced verificationism, an approach that sought to legitimize philosophical discourse on a basis shared with the best examples of empirical sciences. In this theory of knowledge, only statements verifiable either logically or empirically would be cognitively meaningful. Seeking to convert philosophy to this new scientific philosophy was aimed to prevent confusion rooted in unclear language and unverifiable claims.[1] The Berlin Circle and the Vienna Circle propounded logical positivism starting in the late 1920s. Interpreting Ludwig Wittgenstein s philosophy of language, logical positivists identified a verifiability principle or criterion of cognitive meaningfulness. From Bertrand Russell s logicism they sought reduction of mathematics to logic as well as Russell s logical atomism, Ernst Mach s phenomenalism—whereby the mind knows only actual or potential sensory experience, which is the content of all sciences, whether physics or psychology—and Percy Bridgman s musings that others proclaimed as operationalism. Thereby, only the verifiable was scientific and cognitively meaningful, whereas the unverifiable was unscientific, cognitively meaningless "pseudostatements"—metaphysic, emotive, or such—not candidate to further review by philosophers, newly tasked to organize knowledge, not develop new knowledge. Logical positivism became famed for vigorous scientific antirealism to purge science of talk about nature s unobservable aspects—including causality, mechanism, and principles—although that goal has been exaggerated[who said this?]. Still, talk of such unobservables would be metaphorical—direct observations viewed in the abstract—or at worst metaphysical or emotional. Theoretical laws would be reduced to empirical laws, while theoretical terms would garner meaning from observational terms via correspondence rules. Mathematics of physics would reduce to symbolic logic via logicism, while rational reconstruction would convert ordinary language into standardized equivalents, all networked and united by a logical syntax. A scientific theory would be stated with its method of verification, whereby a logical calculus or empirical operation could verify its falsity or truth. In the late 1930s, logical positivists fled Germany and Austria for Britain and United States. By then, many had replaced Mach s phenomenalism with Neurath s physicalism, and Carnap had sought to replace verification with simply confirmation. With World War II s close in 1945, logical positivism became milder, logical empiricism, led largely by Carl Hempel, in America, who expounded the covering law model of scientific explanation. The logical positivist movement became a major underpinning of analytic philosophy,[2] and dominated Anglosphere philosophy, including philosophy of science, while influencing sciences, into the 1960s. Yet the movement failed to resolve its central problems,[3][4][5] and its doctrines were increasingly assaulted, most trenchantly by W V O Quine, Norwood Hanson, Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, and Carl Hempel. Contents [hide] 1 Roots 1.1 Language 1.2 Logicism 1.3 Empiricism 2 Origins 2.1 Vienna 2.2 Berlin 2.3 Rivals 2.4 Export 3 Principles 3.1 Analytic/synthetic gap 3.2 Observation/theory gap 3.3 Cognitive meaningfulness 3.3.1 Verification 3.3.2 Confirmation 3.3.3 Weak verification 4 Philosophy of science 4.1 Explanation 4.2 Unity of science 4.3 Theory reduction 5 Critics 5.1 Quine 5.2 Hanson 5.3 Popper 5.4 Kuhn 5.5 Putnam 6 Retrospect 7 Footnotes 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading 11 External links Roots[edit] Language[edit] Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, by the young Ludwig Wittgenstein, introduced the view of philosophy as "critique of language", offering the possibility of a theoretically principled distinction of intelligible versus nonsensical discourse. Tractatus adhered to a correspondence theory of truth (versus a coherence theory of truth). Wittgenstein s influence also shows in some versions of the verifiability principle.[6][7] In tractarian doctrine, truths of logic are tautologies, a view widely accepted by logical positivists who were also influenced by Wittgenstein s interpretation of probability although, according to Neurath, some logical positivists found Tractatus to contain much metaphysics.[8] Logicism[edit] Gottlob Frege began the program of reducing mathematics to logic, continued it with Bertrand Russell, but lost interest in this logicism, and Russell continued it with Alfred North Whitehead in their monumental Principia Mathematica, inspiring some of the more mathematical logical posivists, such as Hans Hahn and Rudolf Carnap.[9] (Carnap s early anti-metaphysical works employed Russell s theory of types.)[10] Carnap envisioned a universal language that could reconstruct mathematics and thereby encode physics.[9] Yet Kurt Gödel s incompleteness theorem showed this impossible except in trivial cases, and Alfred Tarski s undefinability theorem shattered all hopes of reducing mathematics to logic.[9] Thus, a universal language failed to stem from Carnap s 1934 work Logische Syntax der Sprache (Logical Syntax of Language).[9] Still, some logical positivists, including Carl Hempel, continued support of logicism.[9] Empiricism[edit] In Germany, Hegelian metaphysics was a dominant movement, and Hegelian successors such as F H Bradley explained reality by postulating metaphysical entities lacking empirical basis, drawing reaction in the form of positivism.[11] Starting in the late 19th century, there was "back to Kant" movement. Ernst Mach s positivism and phenomenalism were a major influence. Origins[edit] Vienna[edit] The Vienna Circle, gathering around University of Vienna and Café Central, was led principally by Moritz Schlick. Schlick had held a neo-Kantian position, but later converted, via Carnap s 1928 book Der logische Aufbau der Welt—that is, The Logical Structure of the World—which became Vienna Circle s "bible", Aufbau. A 1929 pamphlet written by Otto Neurath, Hans Hahn, and Rudolf Carnap summarized the Vienna Circle s positions. Another member of Vienna Circle to later prove very influential was Carl Hempel. A friendly but tenacious critic of the Circle was Karl Popper, whom Neurath nicknamed the "Official Opposition". Carnap and other Vienna Circle members, including Hahn and Neurath, saw need for a weaker criterion of meaningfulness than verifiability.[12] A radical "left" wing—led by Neurath and Carnap—began the program of "liberalization of empiricism", and they also emphasized fallibilism and pragmatics, which latter Carnap even suggested as empiricism s basis.[12] A conservative "right" wing—led by Schlick and Waismann—rejected both the liberalization of empiricism and the epistemological nonfoundationalism of a move from phenomenalism to physicalism.[12] As Neurath and somewhat Carnap posed science toward social reform, the split in Vienna Circle also reflected political views.[12] Berlin[edit] The Berlin Circle was led principally by Hans Reichenbach. Rivals[edit] Both Moritz Schlick and Rudolf Carnap had been influenced by and sought to define logical positivism versus the neo-Kantianism of Ernst Cassirer—the then leading figure of Marburg school, so called—and against Edmund Husserl s phenomenology. Logical positivists especially opposed Martin Heidegger s obscure metaphysics, the epitome of what logical positivism rejected. In the early 1930s, Carnap debated Heidegger over "metaphysical pseudosentences".[13] Despite its revolutionary aims, logical positivism was but one view among many vying within Europe, and logical positivists initially spoke their language.[13] Export[edit] As the movement s first emissary to the New World, Moritz Schlick visited Stanford University in 1929, yet otherwise remained in Vienna and was murdered at the University, reportedly by a deranged student, in 1936.[13] That year, a British attendee at some Vienna Circle meetings since 1933, A J Ayer saw his Language, Truth and Logic, written in English, import logical positivism to the Anglosphere. By then, Nazi political party s 1933 rise to power in Germany had triggered flight of intellectuals.[13] In exile in England, Otto Neurath died in 1945.[13] Rudolf Carnap, Hans Reichenbach, and Carl Hempel—Carnap s protégé who had studied in Berlin with Reichenbach—settled permanently in America.[13] Upon Germany s annexation of Austria in 1939, remaining logical positivists, many of whom were also Jewish, were targeted and continued flight. Logical positivism thus became dominant in the Anglosphere. Principles[edit] Analytic/synthetic gap[edit] Concerning reality, the necessary is a state true in all possible worlds—mere logical validity—whereas the contingent hinges on the way the particular world is. Concerning knowledge, the a priori is knowable before or without, whereas the a posteriori is knowable only after or through, relevant experience. Concerning statements, the analytic is true via terms arrangement and meanings, thus a tautology—true by logical necessity but uninformative about the world—whereas the synthetic adds reference to a state of facts, a contingency. In 1739, Hume cast a fork aggressively dividing "relations of ideas" from "matters of fact and real existence", such that all truths are of one type or the other.[14][15] By Hume s fork, truths by relations among ideas (abstract) all align on one side (analytic, necessary, a priori), whereas truths by states of actualities (concrete) always align on the other side (synthetic, contingent, a posteriori).[14] At any treatises containing neither, Hume orders, "Commit it then to the flames, for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion".[14] Thus awakened from "dogmatic slumber", Kant quested to answer Hume s challenge—but by explaining how metaphysics is possible. Eventually, in his 1781 work, Kant crossed the tines of Hume s fork to identify another range of truths by necessity—synthetic a priori, statements claiming states of facts but known true before experience—by arriving at transcendental idealism, attributing the mind a constructive role in phenomena by arranging sense data into the very experience space, time, and substance. Thus, Kant saved Newton s law of universal gravitation from Hume s problem of induction by finding uniformity of nature to be a priori knowledge. Logical positivists rejected Kant s synthethic a priori, and staked Hume s fork, whereby a statement is either analytic and a priori (thus necessary and verifiable logically) or synthetic and a posteriori (thus contingent and verifiable empirically).[14] Observation/theory gap[edit] Early, most logical positivists proposed that all knowledge is based on logical inference from simple "protocol sentences" grounded in observable facts. In the 1936 and 1937 papers "Testability and meaning", individual terms replace sentences as the units of meaning.[12] Further, theoretical terms no longer need to acquire meaning by explicit definition from observational terms the connection may be indirect, through a system of implicit definitions.[12] (Carnap also provides an important, pioneering discussion of disposition predicates.)[12] Cognitive meaningfulness[edit] Verification[edit] The logical positivists initial stance was that a statement is "cognitively meaningful" only if some finite procedure conclusively determines its truth.[16] By this verifiability principle, only statements verifiable either by their analyticity or by empiricism were cognitively meaningful. Metaphysics, ontology, as well as much of ethics failed this criterion, and so were found cognitively meaningless. Moritz Schlick, however, did not view ethical or aesthetic statements as cognitively meaningless.[17] Cognitive meaningfulness was variously defined having a truth value; corresponding to a possible state of affairs; naming a proposition; intelligible or understandable as are scientific statements.[18] Ethics and aesthetics were subjective preferences, while theology and other metaphysics contained "pseudostatements", neither true nor false. This meaningfulness was cognitive, although other types of meaningfulness—for instance, emotive, expressive, or figurative—occurred in metaphysical discourse, dismissed from further review. Thus, logical positivism indirectly asserted Hume s law, the principle that is statements cannot justify ought statements, but are separated by an unbridgeable gap. A J Ayer s 1936 book asserted an extreme variant—the boo/hooray doctrine—whereby all evaluative judgments are but emotional reactions. Confirmation[edit] In an important pair of papers in 1936 and 1937, "Testability and meaning", Carnap replaced verification with confirmation, on the view that although universal laws cannot be verified they can be confirmed.[12] Later, Carnap employed abundant logical and mathematical methods in researching inductive logic while seeking to provide and account of probability as "degree of confirmation", but was never able to formulate a model.[19] In Carnap s inductive logic, every universal law s degree of confirmation is always zero.[19] In any event, the precise formulation of what came to be called the "criterion of cognitive significance" took three decades (Hempel 1950, Carnap 1956, Carnap 1961).[12] Carl Hempel became a major critic within the logical positivism movement.[20] Hempel elucidated the paradox of confirmation. Weak verification[edit] The second edition of A J Ayer s book arrived in 1946, and discerned strong versus weak forms of verification. Ayer concluded, "A proposition is said to be verifiable, in the strong sense of the term, if, and only if, its truth could be conclusively established by experience", but is verifiable in the weak sense "if it is possible for experience to render it probable".[21] And yet, "no proposition, other than a tautology, can possibly be anything more than a probable hypothesis".[21] Thus, all are open to weak verification. Philosophy of science[edit] Upon the global defeat of Nazism, and removed from philosophy rivials for radical reform—Marburg neo-Kantianism, Husserlian phenomenology, Heidegger s "existential hermeneutics"—while hosted in the climate of American pragmatism and commonsense empiricism, the neopositivists shed much of their earlier, revolutionary zeal.[1] No longer crusading to revise traditional philosophy into a new scientific philosophy, they became respectable members of a new philosophy subdiscipline, philosophy of science.[1] Receiving support from Ernest Nagel, logical empiricists were especially influential in the social sciences.[22] Explanation[edit] Comtean positivism had viewed science as description, whereas the logical positivists posed science as explanation, perhaps to better realize the envisioned unity of science by covering not only fundamental science—that is, fundamental physics—but the special sciences, too, for instance biology, anthropology, psychology, sociology, and economics.[23] The most widely accepted concept of scientific explanation, held even by neopositivist critic Karl Popper, was the deductive-nomological model (DN model).[24] Yet DN model received its greatest explication by Carl Hempel, first in his 1942 article "The function of general laws in history", and more explicitly with Paul Oppenheim in their 1948 article "Studies in the logic of explanation".[24] In DN model, the stated phenomenon to be explained is the explanandum—which can be an event, law, or theory—whereas premises stated to explain it are the explanans.[25] Explanans must be true or highly confirmed, contain at least one law, and entail the explanandum.[25] Thus, given initial conditions C1, C2 . . . Cn plus general laws L1, L2 . . . Ln, event E is a deductive consequence and scientifically explained.[25] In DN model, a law is an unrestricted generalization by conditional proposition—If A, then B—and has empirical content testable.[26] (Differing from a merely true regularity—for instance, George always carries only $1 bills in his wallet—a law suggests what must be true,[27] and is consequent of a scientific theory s axiomatic structure.[28]) By the Humean empiricist view that humans observe sequence of events, not cause and effect—as causality and causal mechanisms are unobservable—DN model neglects causality beyond mere constant conjunction, first event A and then always event B.[23] Hempel s explication of DN model held natural laws—empirically confirmed regularities—as satisfactory and, if formulated realistically, approximating causal explanation.[25] In later articles, Hempel defended DN model and proposed a probabilistic explanation, inductive-statistical model (IS model).[25] DN model and IS model together form covering law model,[25] as named by a critic, William Dray.[29] (Derivation of statistical laws from other statistical laws goes to deductive-statistical model (DS model).)[30] Georg Hendrik von Wright, another critic, named it subsumption theory,[31] fitting the ambition of theory reduction. Unity of science[edit] Logical positivists were generally committed to "Unified Science", and sought a common language or, in Neurath s phrase, a "universal slang" whereby which all scientific propositions could be expressed.[32] The adequacy of proposals or fragments of proposals for such a language was often asserted on the basis of various "reductions" or "explications" of the terms of one special science to the terms of another, putatively more fundamental. Sometimes these reductions consisted of set-theoretic manipulations of a few logically primitive concepts (as in Carnap s Logical Structure of the World (1928)). Sometimes, these reductions consisted of allegedly analytic or a priori deductive relationships (as in Carnap s "Testability and meaning"). A number of publications over a period of thirty years would attempt to elucidate this concept. Theory reduction[edit] As in Comptean positivism s envisioned unity of science, neopositivists aimed to network all special sciences through the covering law model of scientific explanation. And ultimately, by supplying boundary conditions and supplying bridge laws within the covering law model, all the special sciences laws would reduce to fundamental physics, the fundamental science. Critics[edit] After the Second World War s close in 1945, key tenets of logical positivism, including its atomistic philosophy of science, the verifiability principle, and the fact/value gap, drew escalated criticism. It was clear that empirical claims cannot be verified to be universally true.[12] Thus, as initially stated, the verifiability criterion made universal statements meaningless, and even made statements beyond empiricism for technological but not conceptual reasons meaningless, which would pose significant problems for science.[20][33][34] These problems were recognized within the movement, which hosted attempted solutions—Carnap s move to confirmation, Ayer s acceptance of weak verification—but the program drew sustained criticism from a number of directions by the 1950s. Even philosophers disagreeing among themselves on which direction general epistemology ought to take, as well as on philosophy of science, agreed that the logical empiricist program was untenable, and it became viewed as selfcontradictory.[35] The verifiability criterion of meaning was itself unverified.[35] Notable critics were Nelson Goodman, Willard Van Orman Quine, Norwood Hanson, Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, J L Austin, Peter Strawson, Hilary Putnam, Ludwig von Mises, and Richard Rorty. Quine[edit] Although quite empiricist, American logician Willard Van Orman Quine published the 1951 paper "Two dogmas of empiricism",[36] which challenged conventional empiricist presumptions. Quine attacked the analytic/synthetic division, which the verificationist program had been hinged upon in order to entail, by consequence of Hume s fork, both necessity and apriocity. Quine s ontological relativity explained that every term in any statement has its meaning contingent on a vast network of knowledge and belief, the speaker s conception of the entire world. Quine later proposed naturalized epistemology. Hanson[edit] In 1958, Norwood Hanson s Patterns of Discovery undermined the division of observation versus theory,[37] as one can predict, collect, prioritize, and assess data only via some horizon of expectation set by a theory. Thus, any dataset—the direct observations, the scientific facts—is laden with theory. Popper[edit] An early, tenacious critic was Karl Popper whose 1934 book Logik der Forschung, arriving in English in 1959 as The Logic of Scientific Discovery, directly answered verificationism. Popper heeded the problem of induction as rendering empirical verification logically impossible.[38] And the deductive fallacy of affirming the consequent reveals any phenomenon s capacity to host over one logically possible explanation. Accepting scientific method as hypotheticodeduction, whose inference form is denying the consequent, Popper finds scientific method unable to proceed without falsifiable predictions. Popper thus identifies falsifiability to demarcate not meaningful from meaningless but simply scientific from unscientific—a label not in itself unfavorable. Popper finds virtue in metaphysics, required to develop new scientific theories. And an unfalsifiable—thus unscientific, perhaps metaphysical—concept in one era can later, through evolving knowledge or technology, become falsifiable, thus scientific. Popper also found science s quest for truth to rest on values. Popper disparages the pseudoscientific, which occurs when an unscientific theory is proclaimed true and coupled with seemingly scientific method by "testing" the unfalsifiable theory—whose predictions are confirmed by necessity—or when a scientific theory s falsifiable predictions are strongly falsified but the theory is persistently protected by "immunizing stratagems", such as the appendage of ad hoc clauses saving the theory or the recourse to increasingly speculative hypotheses shielding the theory. Popper s scientific epistemology is falsificationism, which finds that no number, degree, and variety of empirical successes can either verify or confirm scientific theory. Falsificationism finds science s aim as corroboration of scientific theory, which strives for scientific realism but accepts the maximal status of strongly corroborated verisimilitude ("truthlikeness"). Explicitly denying the positivist view that all knowledge is scientific, Popper developed the general epistemology critical rationalism, which finds human knowledge to evolve by conjectures and refutations. Popper thus acknowledged the value of the positivist movement, driving evolution of human understanding, but claimed that he had "killed positivism". Kuhn[edit] With his landmark, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn critically destabilized the verificationist program, which was presumed to call for foundationalism. (Actually, even in the 1930s, Otto Neurath had argued for nonfoundationalism via coherentism by likening science to a boat that scientists must rebuild at sea[citation needed].) Although Kuhn s thesis itself was attacked even by opponents of neopositivism, in the 1970 postscript to Structure, Kuhn asserted, at least, that there was no algorithm to science—and, on that, even most of Kuhn s critics agreed. Powerful and persuasive, Kuhn s book, unlike the vocabulary and symbols of logic s formal language, was written in natural language open to the laypersons.[39] Ironically, Kuhn s book was first published in a volume of Encyclopedia of Unified Science—a project begun by logical positivists—and some sense unified science, indeed, but by bringing it into the realm of historical and social assessment, rather than fitting it to the model of physics.[39] Kuhn s ideas were rapidly adopted by scholars in disciplines well outside natural sciences,[39] and, as logical empiricists were extremely influential in the social sciences,[22] ushered academia into postpositivism or postempiricism.[39] Putnam[edit] The "received view" operates on the correspondence rule that states, "The observational terms are taken as referring to specified phenomena or phenomenal properties, and the only interpretation given to the theoretical terms is their explicit definition provided by the correspondence rules".[11] According to Hilary Putnam, a former student of Reichenbach and of Carnap, the dichotomy of observational terms versus theoretical terms introduced a problem within scientific discussion that was nonexistent until this dichotomy was stated by logical positivists.[40] Putnam s four objections Something is referred to as "observational" if it is observable directly with our senses. Then an observation term cannot be applied to something unobservable. If this is the case, there are no observation terms. With Carnap s classification, some unobservable terms are not even theoretical and belong to neither observation terms nor theoretical terms. Some theoretical terms refer primarily to observation terms. Reports of observation terms frequently contain theoretical terms. A scientific theory may not contain any theoretical terms (an example of this is Darwin s original theory of evolution). Putman also alleged that positivism was actually a form of metaphysical idealism by its rejecting scientific theory s ability to garner knowledge about nature s unobservable aspects. With his "no miracles" argument, posed in 1974, Putnam asserted scientific realism, the stance that science achieves true—or approximately true—knowledge of the world as it exists independently of humans sensory experience. In this, Putnam opposed not only the positivism but other instrumentalism—whereby scientific theory as but a human tool to predict human observations—filling the void left by positivism s decline. Retrospect[edit] By the late 1960s, the neopositivist movement had clearly run its course.[41] Interviewed in the late 1970s, A J Ayer supposed that "the most important" defect "was that nearly all of it was false".[42][43] Although logical positivism tends to be recalled as a pillar of scientism,[44] Carl Hempel was key in establishing the philosophy subdiscipline philosophy of science[13] where Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper brought in the era postpositivism.[39] John Passmore found logical positivism to be "dead, or as dead as a philosophical movement ever becomes".[42] Logical positivism s fall reopened debate over the metaphysical merit of scientific theory, whether it can offer knowledge of the world beyond human experience (scientific realism) versus whether it is but a human tool to predict human experience (instrumentalism).[45][46] Meanwhile, it became popular among philosophers to rehash the faults and failures of logical positivism without investigation of it.[47] Thereby, logical positivism has been generally misrepresented, sometimes severely.[48] Arguing for their own views, often framed versus logical positivism, many philosophers have reduced logical positivism to simplisms and stereotypes, especially the notion of logical positivism as a type of foundationalism.[48] In any event, the movement helped anchor analytic philosophy in the Anglosphere, and returned Britain to empiricism. Minus logical positivists, tremendously influential outside philosophy, especially in psychology and social sciences, intellectual life of the 20th century would be unrecognizable.[13] Footnotes[edit] ^ Jump up to a b c Michael Friedman, Reconsidering Logical Positivism (New York Cambridge University Press, 1999), p xiv. Jump up ^ See "Vienna Circle" in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Jump up ^ Smith, L.D. (1986). Behaviorism and Logical Positivism A Reassessment of the Alliance. Stanford University Press. p. 314. ISBN 9780804713016. LCCN 85030366. The secondary and historical literature on logical positivism affords substantial grounds for concluding that logical positivism failed to solve many of the central problems it generated for itself. Prominent among the unsolved problems was the failure to find an acceptable statement of the verifiability (later confirmability) criterion of meaningfulness. Until a competing tradition emerged (about the late 1950 s), the problems of logical positivism continued to be attacked from within that tradition. But as the new tradition in the philosophy of science began to demonstrate its effectiveness—by dissolving and rephrasing old problems as well as by generating new ones—philosophers began to shift allegiances to the new tradition, even though that tradition has yet to receive a canonical formulation. Jump up ^ Bunge, M.A. (1996). Finding Philosophy in Social Science. Yale University Press. p. 317. ISBN 9780300066067. LCCN lc96004399. To conclude, logical positivism was progressive compared with the classical positivism of Ptolemy, Hume, d Alembert, Compte, John Stuart Mill, and Ernst Mach. It was even more so by comparison with its contemporary rivals—neo-Thomisism, neo-Kantianism, intuitionism, dialectical materialism, phenomenology, and existentialism. However, neo-positivism failed dismally to give a faithful account of science, whether natural or social. It failed because it remained anchored to sense-data and to a phenomenalist metaphysics, overrated the power of induction and underrated that of hypothesis, and denounced realism and materialism as metaphysical nonsense. Although it has never been practiced consistently in the advanced natural sciences and has been criticized by many philosophers, notably Popper (1959 [1935], 1963), logical positivism remains the tacit philosophy of many scientists. Regrettably, the anti-positivism fashionable in the metatheory of social science is often nothing but an excuse for sloppiness and wild speculation. Jump up ^ "Popper, Falsifiability, and the Failure of Positivism". 7 August 2000. Retrieved 30 June 2012. The upshot is that the positivists seem caught between insisting on the V.C. [Verifiability Criterion]—but for no defensible reason—or admitting that the V.C. requires a background language, etc., which opens the door to relativism, etc. In light of this dilemma, many folk—especially following Popper s "last-ditch" effort to "save" empiricism/positivism/realism with the falsifiability criterion—have agreed that positivism is a dead-end. Jump up ^ For example, compare "Proposition 4.024" of Tractatus, asserting that we understand a proposition when we know the outcome if it is true, with Schlick s asserting, "To state the circumstances under which a proposition is true is the same as stating its meaning". Jump up ^ "Positivismus und realismus", Erkenntnis 3 1–31, English trans in Sarkar, Sahotra, ed, Logical Empiricism at its Peak Schlick, Carnap, and Neurath (New York Garland Publishing, 1996), p 38. Jump up ^ For summary of the effect of Tractatus on logical positivists, see the Entwicklung der Thesen des "Wiener Kreises". ^ Jump up to a b c d e Jaako Hintikka, "Logicism", in Andrew D Irvine, ed, Philosophy of Mathematics (Burlington MA North Holland, 2009), pp 283–84. Jump up ^ See Rudolf Carnap, "The elimination Of metaphysics through logical analysis of language", Erkenntnis, 1932;2, reprinted in Logical Positivism, Alfred Jules Ayer, ed, (New York Free Press, 1959), pp 60–81. ^ Jump up to a b Frederick Suppe, "The positivist model of scientific theories", in Scientific Inquiry, Robert Klee, ed, (New York Oxford University Press, 1999), pp 16-24. ^ Jump up to a b c d e f g h i j Sarkar, S; Pfeifer, J (2005). The Philosophy of Science An Encyclopedia 1. Taylor Francis. p. 83. ISBN 9780415939270. ^ Jump up to a b c d e f g h Friedman, Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge U P, 1999), p xii. ^ Jump up to a b c d Antony G Flew, A Dictionary of Philosophy, rev 2nd edn (New York St Martin s Press, 1984), "Hume s fork", p 156. Jump up ^ Helen B Mitchell, Roots of Wisdom A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions, 6th edn (Boston Wadsworth, 2011), "Hume s fork and logical positivism", pp 249-50. Jump up ^ For a classic survey of other versions of verificationism, see Carl G Hempel, "Problems and changes in the empiricist criterion of meaning", Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 1950;41 41-63. Jump up ^ See Moritz Schlick, "The future Of philosophy", in The Linguistic Turn, Richard Rorty, ed, (Chicago University of Chicago Press, 1992), pp 43-53. Jump up ^ Examples of these different views can be found in Scheffler s Anatomy of Inquiry, Ayer s Language, Truth, and Logic, Schlick s "Positivism and realism" (reprinted in Sarkar 1996 and Ayer 1959), and Carnap s Philosophy and Logical Syntax. ^ Jump up to a b Mauro Murzi "Rudolf Carnap (1891—1970)", Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 12 Apr 2001. ^ Jump up to a b Fetzer, James (2012). Edward N. Zalta, ed. "Carl Hempel". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2012 ed.). It would fall to Hempel to become perhaps the most astute critic of that movement and to contribute to its refinement as logical empiricism... Hempel himself attained a certain degree of prominence as a critic of this movement... The analytic/synthetic distinction and the observational/theoretical distinction were tied together by the verifiability criterion of meaningfulness... By this standard, sentences that are non-analytic but also non-verifiable, including various theological or metaphysical assertions concerning God or The Absolute, qualify as cognitively meaningless. This was viewed as a desirable result. But, as Hempel would demonstrate, its scope was far too sweeping, since it also rendered meaningless the distinctively scientific assertions made by laws and theories... The analytic/synthetic distinction took a decided hit when the noted logician, Willard van Orman Quine, published "Two dogmas of empiricism" (1953), challenging its adequacy... While the analytic/synthetic distinction appears to be justifiable in modeling important properties of languages, the observational/theoretical distinction does not fare equally well. Within logical positivism, observation language was assumed to consist of names and predicates whose applicability or not can be ascertained, under suitable conditions, by means of direct observation... Karl Popper (1965, 1968), however, would carry the argument in a different direction by looking at the ontic nature of properties... Hempel (1950, 1951), meanwhile, demonstrated that the verifiability criterion could not be sustained. Since it restricts empirical knowledge to observation sentences and their deductive consequences, scientific theories are reduced to logical constructions from observables. In a series of studies about cognitive significance and empirical testability, he demonstrated that the verifiability criterion implies that existential generalizations are meaningful, but that universal generalizations are not, even though they include general laws, the principal objects of scientific discovery. Hypotheses about relative frequencies in finite sequences are meaningful, but hypotheses concerning limits in infinite sequences are not. The verifiability criterion thus imposed a standard that was too strong to accommodate the characteristic claims of science and was not justifiable... Both theoretical and dispositional predicates, which refer to non-observables, posed serious problems for the positivist position, since the verifiability criterion implies they must be reducible to observables or are empirically meaningless... The need to dismantle the verifiability criterion of meaningfulness together with the demise of the observational/theoretical distinction meant that logical positivism no longer represented a rationally defensible position. At least two of its defining tenets had been shown to be without merit. Since most philosophers believed that Quine had shown the analytic/synthetic distinction was also untenable, moreover, many concluded that the enterprise had been a total failure. Among the important benefits of Hempel s critique, however, was the production of more general and flexible criteria of cognitive significance... Hempel suggested multiple criteria for assessing the cognitive significance of different theoretical systems, where significance is not categorical but rather a matter of degree... The elegance of Hempel s study laid to rest any lingering aspirations for simple criteria of cognitive significance and signaled the demise of logical positivism as a philosophical movement. Precisely what remained, however, was in doubt. Presumably, anyone who rejected one or more of the three principles defining positivism—the analytic/synthetic distinction, the observational/theoretical distinction, and the verifiability criterion of significance—was not a logical positivist. The precise outlines of its philosophical successor, which would be known as "logical empiricism", were not entirely evident. Perhaps this study came the closest to defining its intellectual core. Those who accepted Hempel s four criteria and viewed cognitive significance as a matter of degree were members, at least in spirit. But some new problems were beginning to surface with respect to Hempel s covering-law explication of explanation and old problems remained from his studies of induction, the most remarkable of which was known as "the paradox of confirmation". ^ Jump up to a b Ayer, Language, Truth and Logic, 1946, p 50–51. ^ Jump up to a b Novick, That Noble Dream (Cambridge U P, 1988), p 546. ^ Jump up to a b James Woodward, "Scientific explanation"—sec 1 "Background and introduction", in Zalta EN, ed,The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2011 edn ^ Jump up to a b James Woodward, "Scientific explanation"—Article overview, Zalta EN, ed, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2011 edn ^ Jump up to a b c d e f Suppe, Structure of Scientific Theories (U Illinois P, 1977), pp 619–21. Jump up ^ Eleonora Montuschi, Objects in Social Science (London New York Continuum, 2003), pp 61–62. Jump up ^ Bechtel, Philosophy of Science (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988), p 25. Jump up ^ Bechtel, Philosophy of Science (Lawrence Erlbaum, 1988), pp 27–28. Jump up ^ Georg Hendrik von Wright, Explanation and Understanding (Ithaca NY Cornell University Press, 1971), p 11. Jump up ^ Stuart Glennan, p 276, in Sarkar S Pfeifer J, eds, The Philosophy of Science An Encyclopedia, Volume 1 A–M (New York Routledge, 2006). Jump up ^ Manfred Riedel, pp 3–4, in Manninen J Tuomela R, eds, Essays on Explanation and Understanding Studies in the Foundation of Humanities and Social Sciences (Dordrecht D Reidel Publishing, 1976). Jump up ^ For a review of "unity of science" to, see Gregory Frost-Arnold, "The large-scale structure of logical empiricism Unity of science and the rejection of metaphysics". Jump up ^ John Vicker (2011). Edward N Zalta, ed. "The problem of induction". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 ed.). This initial formulation of the criterion was soon seen to be too strong; it counted as meaningless not only metaphysical statements but also statements that are clearly empirically meaningful, such as that all copper conducts electricity and, indeed, any universally quantified statement of infinite scope, as well as statements that were at the time beyond the reach of experience for technical, and not conceptual, reasons, such as that there are mountains on the back side of the moon. These difficulties led to modification of the criterion The latter to allow empirical verification if not in fact then at least in principle, the former to soften verification to empirical confirmation. Jump up ^ Uebel, Thomas (2008). Edward N. Zalta, ed. "Vienna Circle". The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 ed.). What Carnap later called the "liberalization of empiricism" was underway and different camps became discernible within the Circle... In the first place, this liberalization meant the accommodation of universally quantified statements and the return, as it were, to salient aspects of Carnap s 1928 conception. Everybody had noted that the Wittgensteinian verificationist criterion rendered universally quantified statements meaningless. Schlick (1931) thus followed Wittgenstein s own suggestion to treat them instead as representing rules for the formation of verifiable singular statements. (His abandonment of conclusive verifiability is indicated only in Schlick 1936a.) A second element that began to do so soon was the recognition of the problem of the irreducibility of disposition terms to observation terms... A third element was that disagreement arose as to whether the in-principle verifiability or support turned on what was merely logically possible or on what was nomologically possible, as a matter of physical law etc. A fourth element, finally, was that differences emerged as to whether the criterion of significance was to apply to all languages or whether it was to apply primarily to constructed, formal languages. Schlick retained the focus on logical possibility and natural languages throughout, but Carnap had firmly settled his focus on nomological possibility and constructed languages by the mid-thirties. Concerned with natural language, Schlick (1932, 1936a) deemed all statements meaningful for which it was logically possible to conceive of a procedure of verification; concerned with constructed languages only, Carnap (1936-37) deemed meaningful only statements for whom it was nomologically possible to conceive of a procedure of confirmation of disconfirmation. Many of these issues were openly discussed at the Paris congress in 1935. Already in 1932 Carnap had sought to sharpen his previous criterion by stipulating that those statements were meaningful that were syntactically well-formed and whose non-logical terms were reducible to terms occurring in the basic observational evidence statements of science. While Carnap s focus on the reduction of descriptive terms allows for the conclusive verification of some statements, his criterion also allowed universally quantified statements to be meaningful, provided they were syntactically and terminologically correct (1932a, §2). It was not until one of his Paris addresses, however, that Carnap officially declared the meaning criterion to be mere confirmability. Carnap s new criterion required neither verification nor falsification but only partial testability so as now to include not only universal statements but also the disposition statements of science... Though plausible initially, the device of introducing non-observational terms in this way gave rise to a number of difficulties which impugned the supposedly clear distinctions between logical and empirical matters and analytic and synthetic statements (Hempel 1951). Independently, Carnap himself (1939) soon gave up the hope that all theoretical terms of science could be related to an observational base by such reduction chains. This admission raised a serious problem for the formulation of a meaning criterion how was one to rule out unwanted metaphysical claims while admitting as significant highly abstract scientific claims? ^ Jump up to a b Hilary Putnam (1985). Philosophical Papers Volume 3, Realism and Reason. Philosophical Papers. Cambridge University Press. p. 184. ISBN 9780521313940. LCCN lc82012903. Jump up ^ W V O Quine, "Two dogmas of empiricism", Philosophical Review 1951;60 20-43, collected in Quine, From a Logical Point of View (Cambridge MA Harvard University Press, 1953). Jump up ^ Novick, That Noble Dream (Cambridge U P, 1988), p 527. Jump up ^ Popper then denies that science requires inductive inference or that it actually exists, although most philosophers believe it exists and that science requires it [Samir Okasha, The Philosophy of Science A Very Short Introduction (NY OUP, 2002), p 23]. ^ Jump up to a b c d e Novick, That Noble Dream (Cambridge U P, 1988), pp 526-27. Jump up ^ Hilary Putnam, "Problems with the observational/theoretical distinction", in Scientific Inquiry, Robert Klee, ed (New York, USA Oxford University Press, 1999), pp 25-29. Jump up ^ Nicholas G Fotion (1995). Ted Honderich, ed. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford Oxford University Press. p. 508. ISBN 0-19-866132-0. ^ Jump up to a b Hanfling, Oswald (2003). "Logical Positivism". Routledge History of Philosophy. Routledge. pp. 193f. Jump up ^ "Ayer on Logical Positivism Section 4". 6 30. Jump up ^ Stahl et al, Webs of Reality (Rutgers U P, 2002), p 180. Jump up ^ Hilary Putnam, "What is realism?", in Jarrett Leplin, ed, Scientific Realism (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London University of California Press, 1984), p 140. Jump up ^ Ruth Lane, "Positivism, scientific realism and political science Recent developments in the philosophy of science", Journal of Theoretical Politics, 1996 Jul8(3) 361-82, abstract. Jump up ^ Friedman, Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge, 1999), p 1. ^ Jump up to a b Friedman, Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge, 1999), p 2.