The form of all propositions is the same. The form of all relations between objects is the same. Just because we say things about both houses and cows does not mean that houses and cows are the same. — Fooloso4
But we cannot make a picture of the pictorial form itself, and thus we cannot talk about it in the same way, or maybe at all, as we do with what this form represents, which was a common error made by philosophers. — Pussycat
Extend this to the whole realm of the ethical and maybe then you will catch on and the misguided questioning will end. — Fooloso4
They are alike in that neither can be represented, yet you want to keep talking about them. — Fooloso4
In factual propositions, facts can be represented — Pussycat
In ethical propositions, nothing can be represented. — Pussycat
6.42
Hence also there can be no ethical propositions.
There are three kinds of propositions in the Tractatus: elementary, logical and ethical. — Pussycat
They do not have the same form, in fact I think that ethical propositions are formless. — Pussycat
6.53
The right method of philosophy would be this: To say nothing except what can be said, i.e. the propositions of natural science, i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy: and then always, when someone else wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had given no meaning to certain signs in his propositions.
But later on, Wittgenstein was forced to abandon elementary propositions, I guess this had an impact on the ethical as well. — Pussycat
There are no ethical propositions. Once again — Fooloso4
All propositions have the same form - logical form. It is not that ethical propositions are formless, it is that statements about ethics are not propositions — Fooloso4
There is only one kind of proposition. Elementary propositions are logical propositions — Fooloso4
Yes, this is the conclusion, but we start our investigation assuming there are. — Pussycat
Why can you not say that ethical propositions are not propositions because they lack form? — Pussycat
What about logical propositions such as the modus ponens? Does it represent a state of affairs? — Pussycat
6.1264 Every proposition of logic is a modus ponens presented in signs. (And the modus ponens can not be expressed by a proposition.)
That may be your assumption but it is not an assumption that informs any part of the Tractatus. — Fooloso4
It is not simply lacking form but lacking logical form, which means they do not say anything about what is the case. — Fooloso4
6.1264 Every proposition of logic is a modus ponens presented in signs. (And the modus ponens can not be expressed by a proposition.)
I don't think it is just my assumption. — Pussycat
So there, you agree that they lack form or logical form? — Pussycat
So are propositions of logic indeed propositions, or something else? Do they have the same form as elementary propositions? — Pussycat
6.1
The propositions of logic are tautologies.
6.11
The propositions of logic therefore say nothing. (They are the analytical propositions.)
6.12
The fact that the propositions of logic are tautologies shows the formal—logical— properties of language, of the world.
6.121
The propositions of logic demonstrate the logical properties of propositions by combining them so as to form propositions that say nothing.
6.124
The propositions of logic describe the scaffolding of the world, or rather they represent it. They have no ‘subject-matter’. They presuppose that names have meaning and elementary propositions sense; and that is their connexion with the world. It is clear that something about the world must be indicated by the fact that certain combinations of symbols—whose essence involves the possession of a determinate character—are tautologies. This contains the decisive point. — Tractatus
If you reach the end of the Tractatus and still hold to that assumption then you have not understood the text. — Fooloso4
If you have read what I have been saying with due care and attention that is not a question you would ask. — Fooloso4
You are so nice! :) — Pussycat
You should have been a teacher or something similar, if you are not already, that is. — Pussycat
I will not enlighten a heart that is not already struggling to understand, nor will I provide the proper words to a tongue that is not already struggling to speak. If I hold up one corner of a problem and the student cannot come back to me with the other three, I will not attempt to instruct him again. (Analects 7.8)
I really can't say. I do not know the author or anything other than the title of the book and one positive review.
If you like to collect books that's one thing, but if your interest is in reading then there are, in my opinion, better sources, some of them free. — Fooloso4
You have been struggling to find where my interpretation goes wrong and/or where Wittgenstein's does, but the only things that you have pointed to is where you have gone wrong. — Fooloso4
Never crossed my mind that we were playing crossbows and catapults, with myself in the role of the attacker and you the defender. — Pussycat
Are you in for teamwork or do you prefer going solo? — Pussycat
You set the adversarial tone several months ago. — Fooloso4
I will let the record speak for itself. — Fooloso4
What teamwork? What part of the heavy lifting did you contribute when I went through the text? — Fooloso4
You seem to be unaware of the extent of my patience, even after it has been pointed out by another member. — Fooloso4
You seem to be unaware of the extent of my patience, even after it has been pointed out by another member.
— Fooloso4
Ah yes, Amity, she fell sick of our bickering, and eventually left — Pussycat
...what about me, what about my efforts, my patience, my world? — Pussycat
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.