Witt does seem to disregard his own statements, and say quite a bit about what shouldn't be said...but, that's because this isn't the agenda of the work, despite discussing many relevant positivist ideas, and problems. — 013zen
The essential business of language is to assert or deny facts. Given the syntax of language, the meaning of a sentence is determined as soon as the meaning of the component words is known. In order that a certain sentence should assert a certain fact there must, however the language may be constructed, be something in common between the structure of the sentence and the structure of the fact. This is perhaps the most fundamental thesis of Mr. Wittgenstein’s theory. That which has to be in common between the sentence and the fact cannot, he contends, be itself in turn said in language. It can, in his phraseology, only be shown, not said, for whatever we may say will still need to have the same structure. — ibid.
I hope this helps. — 013zen
(4.021)A proposition is a picture of reality.
From that perspective, Witt does seem to disregard his own statements, and say quite a bit about what shouldn't be said... — 013zen
(6.42)So too it is impossible for there to be propositions of ethics. Propositions can express nothing that is higher.
It doesn't. You make a distinction between the world as pictures in the mind and reality not being pictures in the mind. — Fooloso4
What do you find in the text regarding pictures that is true of the world but not true of reality? — Fooloso4
Wheren does he make a distinction between the pictures of the world being in the mind and pictures of reality not being in the mind? — Fooloso4
Would you say Wittgenstein was attempting to bridge the gap between the disciplines of science and philosophy? — DifferentiatingEgg
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.