Full Idea
The source of the Quinean scepticism about analytic and synthetic is, first, scepticism over whether we can factor truth into a semantic and a factual component, and (second) if we can, is the factual component ever null?
Gist of Idea
The Quinean doubt: are semantics and facts separate, and do analytic sentences have no factual part?
Source
Kit Fine (Semantic Necessity [2010], 1)
Book Reference
'Modality', ed/tr. Hale,B/Hoffman,A [OUP 2010], p.67
A Reaction
You certainly can't grasp 'bachelors are unmarried men' if you haven't grasped the full Woosterian truth about men and marriage. But I could interdefine four meaningless words, so that you could employ them in analytic sentences.