The world is the totality of facts, not of things.

Shawn

“I want you to realize that when I speak of a fact I do not mean a particular
existing thing, such as Socrates or the rain or the sun. Socrates himself does not
render any statement true or false. What I call a fact is the sort of thing that
is expressed by a whole sentence, not by a single name like ‘Socrates.’ . . .We
express a fact, for example, when we say that a certain thing has a certain
property, or that it has a certain relation to another thing; but the thing which
has the property or the relation is not what I call a ‘fact.”’

If the essence of the first proposition of the Tractatus is of relations between objects, further describable (which already is a contested issue) as facts, then what does Russell mean by these relations?

Wheatley

“I want you to realize that when I speak of a fact I do not mean a particular
existing thing, such as Socrates or the rain or the sun. Socrates himself does not
render any statement true or false. What I call a fact is the sort of thing that
is expressed by a whole sentence, not by a single name like ‘Socrates.’ . . .We
express a fact, for example, when we say that a certain thing has a certain
property, or that it has a certain relation to another thing; but the thing which
has the property or the relation is not what I call a ‘fact.”’ Citation

If the essence of the first proposition of the Tractatus is of relations between objects, further describable (which already is a contested issue) as facts, then what does Russell mean by these relations? — Shawn

B1: Who's said this?

B2: Who's the author of the Tractatus?

B3: Do you mean Bertrand Russel?

magritte

We
express a fact, for example, when we say that a certain thing has a certain
property, or that it has a certain relation to another thing — Shawn

Do you agree that facts are what we say about a certain property or a certain relation?

Banno

↪magritte

Well, no.

A fact is what we say, when what we say is true. If it ain't true, it ain't a fact.

magritte

↪Banno

So then by

when I speak of a fact I do not mean a particular existing thing — Shawn

W specifically means himself only by "I" because facts are truths?

Banno

↪magritte

Lets first get clear that the long quote is from Russell's Logical Atomism and the aphorism is the first line of Wittgenstein's Tractatus.

W specifically means himself only by "I" because facts are truths? — magritte

Presumably you meant Russell? He is simply setting out how he intends to use the word "fact".

You don't think truths are somehow private, do you?

magritte

For the moment, your truths are my truths. I'm willing to go along with whatever might help me disentangle my confusion.

He is simply setting out how he intends to use the word "fact". — Banno

Is he then replacing the usual real objects with whatever facts about those objects he postulates to be true or must others (everyone?) also agree that his facts are true? How far out on a limb must he climb?

Shawn

Do you agree that facts are what we say about a certain property or a certain relation? — magritte

Yes, I think so.

Banno

↪magritte

↪Shawn

The Moon is not a fact.

That the Moon orbits the Earth is a fact.

That "The Moon orbits the Earth" is true is also a fact.

Oddly, that the moon orbits the Earth, and that "The Moon orbits the Earth" is true, are each going to be true only if the other is also true. They are equivalent.

Also note, that the Moon orbits the Earth is true regardless of what Russell or Magritte think or say.

Shawn

↪Banno

Relations are usually causal and evident. The fact that the moon orbits the Earth is governed by the fact that the laws of physics determine it being so. Not, yet ready to talk about logical space, just yet.

magritte

↪Banno

Scientific facts would work because they are grounded in current physics. Is that enough?

The world is the totality of facts, not of things.

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions