However, the question of which statements are necessarily true remains the subject of continued debate.
Empiricists commonly respond to this objection by arguing that logical truths (which they usually deem to be mere tautologies), are analytic and thus do not purport to describe the world.
Other than logical truths, there is also a second class of analytic statements, typified by "no bachelor is married".
[citation needed] In his essay Two Dogmas of Empiricism, the philosopher W. V. O. Quine called into question the distinction between analytic and synthetic statements.
It was this second class of analytic statements that caused him to note that the concept of analyticity itself stands in need of clarification, because it seems to depend on the concept of synonymy, which stands in need of clarification.
[citation needed] Considering different interpretations of the same statement leads to the notion of truth value.
The simplest approach to truth values means that the statement may be "true" in one case, but "false" in another.
Therefore, until it is determined how to make a distinction between all logical constants regardless of their language, it is impossible to know the complete truth of a statement or argument.
Among other things, the logical positivists claimed that any proposition that is not empirically verifiable is neither true nor false, but nonsense.