How an Empiricist Founds a New Science

In his groundbreaking article, Godel (1966) argued that “De Saussure’s approach to
language is “a philosophical one”. In this same article Godel compared Saussure’s work to
the Cartesian inquiry. However, subsequently in a few researches the philosophical
inclinations of Saussure were convincingly doubted.1
In this paper I would like to challenge
the other part of Godel’s argument, the resemblance to Descartes. I believe that while there
might be some external similarities, Suassure’s speculation is very different in respect to its
methodology and aspirations. Since, unlike Descartes, the rationalist, Saussure took upon
himself an empiricist’s task of establishing an empirical science.
Let me first clarify the context of the current inquiry. In many descriptions of
Saussure’s revolution, and especially when he is portrayed as the founder of the Structuralist
movement, his theory is presented in light of a rationalist way of thinking. The question at
stake is whether this is indeed an appropriate description of his life project. Although we
will have to admit that there are good reasons to read Saussure as a rationalist, nevertheless
to my understanding a careful reading will indicate the opposite.2
It should be emphasized that this discussion is not theoretical per se. Answering this
question will shed light on the entire project to which Saussure devoted the two last decades
of his life.