Rejection of the analytic-synthetic distinction

The rejection of the analytic-synthetic distinction challenges the idea that some statements are true solely by their meaning (analytic) while others depend on factual evidence (synthetic). Philosophers who reject this divide argue that all meaningful claims involve some combination of meaning and empirical content, and that the boundary between them isn't as clear-cut as traditionally thought. This view encourages viewing knowledge as more interconnected, where understanding depends on context, experience, and language, rather than separating statements into purely definitional truths or factual assertions.