If Moore's propositions or hinges cannot be known, it follows that there are no grounds/justification or reasons/evidence to say they are true. — Sam26
Fooloso4 We disagree and that's fine, but I'm moving on to continue the analysis. — Sam26
If Moore held up his hand as said: "This is a hand" we could look and confirm that it is indeed a hand. If he raised his hand and said instead: "This is a foot" we would know that it is not a foot. — Fooloso4
And yes, 2x2=4 is not an interpretation, but whether it's a hinge or not is. — Sam26
If Moore held up his hand as said: "This is a hand" we could look and confirm that it is indeed a hand. — Fooloso4
Of course it is true that 2+2=4. No one here doubts that. — Banno
That 12x12=144 is not subject to doubt; it could not be false, and hence is outside our considerations of true and false... — Banno
What if he raised his arm and said "this is an arm"? How would that act of holding up his arm be different from the act of holding up his his hand? How do you propose that we could confirm whether he's actually holding up a hand, or an arm? — Metaphysician Undercover
Of course it is true that 2+2=4. No one here doubts that. — Banno
So, in this case "I know..." means that I have learned how to use the word hand. The same can be said of 2+2=4, in some contexts it can makes sense to say it's true, other contexts not so much. I don't know what Wittgenstein would say about this. OC 10 doesn't give enough information. — Sam26
is "2x2=4"...not a proposition of arithmetic, apart from particular occasions? "2x2=4" is a true proposition of arithmetic—not [only] "on particular occasions" nor "always"
Moreover, Wittgenstein never edited his thoughts in OC, it's just a rough draft. — Sam26
The fact that it doesn't make sense to doubt Moore's propositions, seems to also hold for the mathematical proposition 2+2=4. Can I doubt that it's true that 2+2=4. It seems senseless to doubt it. — Sam26
If it were the result of Wittgenstein's philosophy that hinge propositions are neither true nor false, have you considered that this might not be because they are indubitable, but because they are usually non-propositional (except for W's exposition of them)? If memory serves, I believe that Daniele Moyal-Sharrock regards hinges as non-propositional. — Luke
12. - For "I know" seems to describe a state of affairs which guarantees what is known, guarantees it as a fact. One always forgets the expression "I thought I knew".
So, you don't think there are mathematical hinges? — Sam26
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.