system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
For what reasons do most philosophers still believe in the analytic-synthetic divide, given Quine's refutation?

Has there been a successful way to show that the divide is still functional and not circular?

Why do most philosophers believe that the divide is true?

(As a side question, what is Quine's view of maths if it not analytic? How do we come to know mathematical truths on his view?)
gpt
Some just think that his argument depends on a unwarranted skepticism about modal notions like necessity. If you assume that you can define necessity in ways independent of analyticity, like in a possible worlds analysis or something, then there is no circle.

Some think that the fact that the concepts are circularly defined isn't a problem. It's just an instance of the paradox of analysis. At some point we just have to assume we understand a concept without being able to define it in other terms.