.
.... TIE:::) IS
for the de;3ree
by
J.WID
ALJGU; r,
1964
I'
i
Page
I.
II ..
III •.
Pro bIen
1
Introduction
1
nody
6
1\.
B.
C.
D.
p
..:..
F.
,..,
l1.
TI.
V.
Propo:::ition
.'?ropos it ion
Pro;: 0:'; :.tion
Pro:,os i t.i on
I'ro:)osi tion
Pro)()sition
Pro:lOsi-::ion
Fumber
NUDGer
I:ur.1ber
EUl:'ocr
?:unber
lIumbcr
I~t~bcr
1
2
6
3
12
4
5
17
6
7
10
10
3urT:'l.'1ry :1nd Rec::qit:.llation
Bib15.osra.) ,y
"
u
13
27
PROBLEH
The object of this ;>aJ)cr is to gl.ve an exposition and develoJ.ment
of
Ludwi:~
Wittgenstein's "mirror theory" as it relates to lan:::;uaGe
expresse.d in the Tractatus Logico-philosophic us.
"Hirror theory" su~gests that the. !lain function of language is
descrij?t:.ve.
Lan~uaLe describes the actual state of affairs;
real ity as a mirror reflects a certain im"ge.
if lan:~uage mirrors reality
j
n Hhat sense and
it mirrors
The quest i.on tit hand is:
hO\.;
does it reflect the
state of affairs?
INT~WD[jCTION
Hittgenstein
between a Ford and
su~~':sests
;}rl
object, and yet in I.1calin[; Hith lan:juage, syrbols
and not object.s are used.
The relation bctHecn langua,::;e and reality
is the re:J.Ir of sef'l;tnl:ics.
state of
that there is a one to one correspondence
-,Jilat connects a sentence t,1'ith an actaal
af~airs?
To Hitt::;enstein all our knoHledGe about the Horid comes through
the med i.un of lanGuage; therefore tlle
the 1 anguage t'le use:
T,·!orl(~
"The liF,its of my
","orid. "(Tractatus 5.6)*
we knm.; is in3eparable fron
lan[~uage
tlean
t~,e
licits of my
Knmlledgc is not merely the grasping or having
*Note '. All quo t a t'1.ons f
ItT
roT'1
le ractatus Logico-Philosphicus \'1i11 be
in p2renthesis ,lith th~ nUl'~ber of the proj?osition after the quotation.
2
of ideas or i.mprcssions as Locl:e SHs;[;e3tcd, but i.nstead it is involved
in:
pra~;matism
1.
2.
losical ;JosLtiviSl1 (er"piricisr.l)
If kno,lledse is merely the han,~\.;rritjn:: u:>on tile "tab-ula r'1sa", then all
that ,,]ould be nece:::s,1ry for this knoHled~e Hould be to sit oncl: like a
• 1
geir;er counter and start tickin;; Hith l.(l.ea s.
eval uation are es scm: ially connected.
"Knm·,ledgc, action, and
The primary and ;;ervasive
signific:tnce of l:no\de.c1gc lies in itc: ,:uirlance of actLon: 1,noHin:; is
for t:.le saLe v;': doin'~. ,.1
A~ Peirce. :::ut~:~eGt s , ideas
2...C<:'
'~mcanin::;ful"
only if i.t is 90ssible to conceive of ef7ects or conse.que:<ccs that
T.voulc~
a[Eect oUr e::pc:ricnce.
2
"The neaninG of n "lOrd is its use i.n tl',:: lan~~ua<.:e.lt3
\Jords are
like. to01s '·lith cr~rt,cin fun<:tions, ,'lnd "All tc.ols serve to modify
sOLethin:3.',4
The validity of a tool is its valid-ation.
Hords the connecti.on of
stateneni:
1.S
l"n[ua~e
In other
to reality lies in action.
"A
factual} y si·:nif icant to a Sivc!l ?erson if and only if
hm! to ve.rify the pro~)ositions \,hieh it ~ur:)orts to express.
In line ,lith the Viennese circle, ':'litt';enste.in
rE~nouncec1
5
It
a r.etaplcysl.c
by stat in:::;:
"j'1y proposition.:; are (::lucidatory in this \,'ay: he ..,ho
und~;r3t:-H1ds
role finally reco:znizes them as senseless,
Hhen he has climbed out throu:)1 them, on them, over
_.
leI arence I
'
~Le'J1.S,
.
. oE Knmdcdgc and Valuation, p. 3.
rvLnc;
An Analys1.s
2C • .'..~.
J.
l'cLrce,
-
-
-- ------
7
"how to H<':d:e Our Ideas CleAr, tt Popular Science
--~---12 t J a nu.l. ry, 1873.
3
.
Lud\H;j ':littG(:nstein, Philoso:)hical InvestiGati.ons, P. 20.
4 Ibid ., P. 7.
.
~ronthlv,
3
then.
(He nust so to speal~ thrmJ ;u,ay the ladder, 2.::ter
he has cliMbed 0;"1 it.) He unst surmount these proposit:~ons; then he sees tr.e uorld riShtlY. "(Tractntu8 ,i.54)
~3inee
lan:~ua:~e
re:llity (fact) is ex;:>ressed in
lanz~uar;e,
(reality) cC'.n nev:or be transcended to
an-sieh....
the. forr., of
observE~
"din~-
that forn
Statencnt::- about (that "say") l;,n.:.;uaSe ent,-r t;le noninal
realE', ,chile st:lter'ents tr.at "ShOH" describe the phenomenal reClln.
Carnap's "physical lan::.;ua:::;e" is constructed to
perfect
lan~;tla~e".
e:=~)re:3.3
a
"lo~;ically
Russell in the introduction to Ihtt:.:;enstein's
Tractatu:~ LOGieo-~Jh:dosophicus
stated
tI • • •
he is eonccriled Hith the
ccnditions Hhich ,'lOulct have to be fulfilled by a lo::;icall:r perfect
languase"rrl
But since it HaS helo by Hitt~el1stein that language. is
the lir'it of reality (knmvn) a constructed language Hould be a
metaphys :i.e'll :3ta tenent; therefore
Lo~ico-l?hilosophicus
\J:ltt~,'nstein
says in t b.e rractatus
that "All .?roposi tions of our collo'lL ial L:m:;uage
are actually, just a,: they are, locica lly completely i.n order. tt(Tractatus
5.5563)
"The object of philoso;;hy is the clarificntion of thought: a
ty,)rl: of ;,hilosophy cons ists of eluc idations. U(Tractatus 4.112)
reGard to
t~iis,
Kantinn
~)hi.losojhy
In
mny be expressed as £0110\.Js:
a.
"'!'he task of tlw.oretiC.'11 J?hilosophy is to l'aLe transcenclental
deductions concernin;'; t:~e lir'Lts of theoretical discourse,
not to SlH~cl1late over Hhat trntlscencls t~lis Ii.nit and thus
cannot be trceoretically ::not.Jn.
b. A Horlcl is a i)Ossible 'tlOrld of exp erience only if it is
"possible" to ttleorctical reason, i. c. if i.t is ina[,inable
and intelli~ible.
c. Our experience has a ttform" Hhich is founded in theoretical
reason and a "c ontent tt ,,;hich is oased on our sensat ions.
d.
True synthetical ~)roposil:ions are a l)riori if the.y refer only
to tile form of experience, a poster Lori if they refer also
to the COi1'tent.,,2
lLU(hv:i.~
2
Hit t~enstein, Tractatus Lorrico-Pllilosonlticus
----_.-
>?
od
..
Erii:-ltenius, \Vitt~enstein's Tractatus, p. 217.
,
P. 7.
4
The. tac;:; of philosophy for Hitt~cn3tein, as it HaS for Ka.nt, is to
indicate the lir'its of discourse; the trai~sccndcntal de.dl.:ctions of
Kant are the sare that are found in l.Jitt;.::cnstein's la,sic~ll an21:n~is:
"Lo:~~.c is not tele.ary :)ut a re.flect:Lon of t;'.c Horld.
Lo~)c is
transcendent.:!l. "(Tractatus 6.1:;;)
Hi tt::-;e.nstcin traces the ,·,orlel as a ::act to the pro~)c;;i. L.ion or
language.
His c.;even t',leses.'xpressed in the Tractatus Lo::;;ico-
Philosophicus are:
-----1.
2.
7.
'the Iwrld is every thin.: t:~at is the case.
\~hat is the CE~se - the fact - is the existence 0':: atomic facts.
The 10f:;-!cal i)icture of the facts i.s the th,:.;u:;ht.
1'"he thouGht is tile s:L;~ni:[icant proposition.
The iJro,)osi tion is the si.;<ni:Eicant ))ro')ositLon.
The :}'n~ral Eorn of tr:ith- functions- is' (P,;~,N(E).
This is the ::;enc'.ral Eon] of Qropositions •
.'Jhat vie can:lOt S)e.~1i: of t \'Ie I'lust be silent about.
A bricf elucic1ati.on of tile centr8.1 idc,lS state.: above [0110\015, as
\VeIl a,r; the
paper.
Objl';Ct.C;.
rcU'-(vlol,)~;:/
The Forla i::;
used in tile ex;)osi Lion rtnc1 clC'J'elO'1ncnt of this
l~no';]n
as an existent fact, not a; unrelated
Relations of objects to others are eXi)reS8Ccl in a ;Jro;.)Qsition
,;hich ;-;xprcsses the ,:act.
buildin;; blocks of a
/1.tN'1ic L.::-,cts ::':.1'e
lan:~12a~c.
si.r~ple r~:dati()nst
A rental image is in
Hith the empirical forT" of r0..'11ity
QS
a
thou~ht
tile lC'ental !Jicture 1..<: transfo1'rred into a verbal
corres~ondcnce
Hhich constructs a
j)
icture.
either ne:ntal or verbal, "reflects" the state of affairs.
st?ten'.cnts !J.re Made
1)~)
of ('ler:1ent2r:,.; (atomic)
or fals.:.ty can be c1ct::rni.ncd by a tnlth table.
j)ro~lOsitiollS
This picture,
Cor'?ound
Hilose truth
Optative .:md hortatory
sentence.:;; as Hell as others May be trnnslatcd into inc1ic;,tive,
tive propositions.
the
dcscri~)-
The forr' of a truth funct·; on is "E" - an atonic
proposi.tion ~:ith.'1 set of nc::at'ons N(~).
'That cannot bc said clearly
cannot b,~ said at all [or it nl(~allS the Hord is bein~~ used ir:lpro)?erly in
re::;ard to its logic.
1'he above is the General
Lo~>co-i!ililosoplti_cus
:l,e.velo~pent
foune in the Tractatus
and develops the ideas e::nressed by Hitttenstein.
The first part of the Tractatus LOGico-Philosophicus ;m:_:,_,!sts that
prO')03)_t:'_ons do reflect reality "hi_le. the last half
proi)osit:~ons
do not say 8nyt11in::; about reality.
attenpt, at the end of the ')aJcr. to
brin~
state~;
that
This author Hill
se~t'in~;ly
to/;"ther the
contradictory stater"ents into a uni_fied llhole.
The. task: of exposition perhaps does not seem difi>cult; but
because of,.]ittzenstei.n' s cryptic and aj)horistic style as "eI I <13 the
men.tl:3 of presentat ion a con, is tent ckve10pDent is very
(1
i Cficul t.
Ira in
theses are in('ic,'lte(1 by a ',Jhole numb,;r, i. e. l, 2, 3, uhi,le those
proIlositions ."hich are roorC'. dct;,:i_lcc1 and sub-pro 1)ositions to the main
proI,)ositions are nunbp-red Hith a decit;lal systec, i. c. 1.1 is a subproposition to 1 ""hil':! 1.11 is a sub-pro:Jositf_on to 1.1.
\'littr;cnstcin
is not consistent \!it-ll the enuneration and therefore tlle. deductive
prOC€~S3
is not ah.'ays clear.
For this reason the nain,;ro~os:i_tj_on
numbers 02.in~; :'.iscussP..d Hill be ~)laced <1t thQ top of t:,lC i)a(;e for the
rC<.H:er's (!onvenience.
Also Hith:i.n thc Tractatus Logico-philosoyhicus there are Dany
pro;;>ositions Hhich cor: J lcte1y contradict each other, but uhich Lny
stand to~~:ther both valid and r'('anin:~ful, e. g. the £01'PJa1 stateilents
depcnJent ll;)On their
£orr~
(deductions) alone as cor:parErl to those
statel'1ents t;rhich receive. their valic1ity fron Schlich's or Garna1"s
''veri::ication principle".
mct<1physical bent in ;vittgcnstein's philosophy.
line Hith tOne .'.>ositivi3t t
physical in fk1.ture.
,:;
Althou:';i he Has in
school many of his statements were meta-
Fleibleman callec hir) both a "met.:l ..)[lysical
G
real ist" and an "ep L; tCf'ol 0~ica1 rea1is til, tree forner bel ieved foms
or ide.al:; exL]ted (Platonic univerw.ls), thc latter that the
particul.3.rs are real.
to stand t08;e.ther,
llow is it possible for PIa to and Aristotle
Oi..' HmIl{-;:
and Descartes?
BODY
The first Bain proposi.tion and its sUb-;)ro[>ositions read as
fol101-:s:
The Horld is everythinG that is the case.
1.
1.1 The uorld is the totality of: facts, not of thin:;s.
1.11 The Hor1d i_S detr;rT1inec1 by the L?cts, and by these being
all the faets.
pcrce~)t
The above statements are based upon the "fLcld of
relate:> to
of
lan:;uaf~e
entities
C0113
12:)
is temo10s'Y.
The Horlel (anyone. t s Hor1el) '::,y t lle extent
is all that exists; it is not a nere
floatin~ throu~h
Lon" as it
con~nor~f..:rat ion
of
space like Heraclitus, but instead reality
ists of definite fae ts or relationships.
the indi.vi.dual lines (particulars or
thinr~s)
In ·the
:Ei~urc
beloH
are combined into a
structurl:O ,"1ho18 Oa'd of !Jroxinity).
1
1
The lines isolated have no Deanin(!; in a formal series for the \-J1101e
assumes 1:he series.
"BecRuse the 4 objects have certai.n Jefj.nite
qualitic::: anI.: sta:rl in a certfll.n c1cf:nite r,"lat;.on to each other He can
that the pictnre a~prehendcd has a structure."
2
The ci'~ht 1 incs arc taken f:i.ri,t as a ,·;hole Hi tIl
,.
<l
~,tr'l.lcture, then
7
the part Lculars are deduced fron tlle Hho1c.
Me..:lI1S to :)crceive th;lt its constituents arc cotlbin..::(l :~.n ~:'lch Cl
uaY."(Tr;tcta~ 5 • .5423)
A"Gedanl:e" (thou~ht) is a "Tatsaclle" (fact)
and because of this has a structural r8Iationsh~p.
i~l object that is
synboliz{~d in n thou';ht falls into a definite situati.on and thus the
thought is a fact.
(Inc ca[1not blink of an "apple" Hithout seeing it
in some 2ield of percept ion, i. e. on a tree, on a table, etc.
Does
the thought forn the fact or does tile [act fonl the thou::::ht?
In the function F(a, b) F(b, c) •
,1e~en,lencc
type of
series
b~r
Hhich it
betHccr: the
(~E'.ve10ps,
It
•
that Hhich determines the
'bc;rs is net found
t13SUECcl
a t1en;bcr of the
~).:J.rticulars.
or presup:}osed by a generic
In t1'.is forna1 case or in a case of
the qualities of
a~;
but instead of disco:mcctcc!
The fon, is an ordered nanifol:
conce,)t.
DCl
..
tllin~;s
~)erCel}t
i.on as above
and the .)lire aspect 02 rclaLon !Ire
placed on the S,1.!"e level and fU8ecl t.]ithout dL;tinc·tion ... 1
Hords, t;-lC
01:
redn(~ss.
rc.l2.tionshi~);;hich nal~cs
up a fact is
In other
presl'ppos(~d
'3'icetness, etc., but tIte r21ation:::l aspects
prior
0l,C~l
as
distance to another object or tetc contexts into uhich an apple nay
fit i::; detertrlined.
Ted.s is ("!enonstrnted later in the
~aper.
(Sec
~)P.
The coordinate systeM of Neilton Has of o.ln;olute s~)ac' and time,
for the:,' 1.11 stand in a T)articular Hay to tlee )crceive.r.
"The
structure O( the ,;orlcl is clet(:rninec1 by the '.}('.Y the 11orle' as a fact
9-10)
inplications.
t'1cnts (<1.tof'ic _)ro
JOS
-tiollS) have no parts 1-Jhich arc t>c!~3,.!lv~;s
ItE-i.ther tlle class
':,:nc,l are statenent".
::'sj-mct "3;.11"
facts
accordi-w~
~n,-,l
H
d 1 clcc t "31.11
the seccnd clis:iunct "JO(;".
Atomic
to Rus.':ell, tl:.crefore, the entire
Horl(~
'liJ
1 !Je
pro~)Qsi.t'ns
are
.)1-
.Joe
can be
constructed ont or: t~e conbination of 2tOllic (s inple) pro)os5. ti".-.i1s.
iact.
Eussell 2:or:s on to say, h01Jo.Ver, th,1.t "All
about sj'ubol.s.
Hoc,-
th,~n
])er1'.'1.1)3) i:',.'1t
are
'1"1".'.'
.l ,,~~
Iln.
\-:..ver
tLo~;e
about the
tl,-i
..;,. til~.\.._t
...
..
M~_n,_,.)
-0.'
staterncl.ts are
,,,:,>(~_V .;c.
__ ~}
••••
,,2
can st;:ter',ents be nac1,~ that are neanin:,1ul (an6i:rue
h~'.v(:
Ir:
no
.'l
cr~)irLcal
referent (object in Russell's
stat.er,ent i.s nadc about t1,o. Itfouctai;, of yc"th"
"Pro:)cr n.'lnes't have 1'c;. . l
referents, such as (.jucen :nizt:.b::ti.'t a ,vi are
2~El1iarr: P • .\lston and '3eorge HaLhnil:::ian, Rcadin~s in;l';-lentieth
Centl'~Y i?l~.5.loso)hy,
11.
2~)6.
In '-littGcnstein's systen the totality of facts (fatJ.J.chen) is
nade Hi:> of (Sachvehal t) atonic facts (hold of thin~s)" i. e. a Hay
s:.tuat' on of "ltonic facts as exprcs!3ec1 in an eleri'cntarY)l:"oposition
one in another, lil:;(, the links of
Hay in
~lhich
.:l
chain. "(Tractatus
2.,,~;)
"The
tl'-c objects han:· to[Sether i.n the .'ytonic fnet is the
structure of the ator:ic fact. "(Tr8.ctatus 2.032)
The fi::ec1, the
e:dstent and t>e object are one, and i.n tile atomic fact oojects are
conbined in a definite Hay.
Tile atoraic L,ct i.s not
t~Le
actual
combinations of objects, b,lt is 6J.€. possible t"ay objects n.ay hang
to:?;ethcr.
in
tryin'~.
iolitt::;enstei.n
c~oes
not have the problen tlloJ.t
to naue one atccic f:1Ct for
lan~~uaGe
I~usGell
had
postulates the possible
relat:i..on:~hips.
Here arises the:robl ePl t',lat object,'; are incle:1e :1(le:-,t, 3tat ic,
fixed, .:n:~ yet part 0:: a structure i.n a fjeld of )c.rce}tion located
in lo:).c:tl Space.
As seen before in (2ia~raD. 1 tlle ~);:rticular lin::.s
perceiver: the pay objects ~1C1l1~'; to;3cther dc:)cnds upon
hOil
they are
perceived.
If the: 1 inl~ of a chain is broken t:1C structural rel:ct:~on of one
lin!: to .::moi:l1er is altered either by bein'~ a useless cl'~ain or by
the len·~th oein:: altered so tb.,'lt the orl.::.;inal object no lon~(-,r Deets
Sf.!ej.nc that tb.e structural rel.:lt~onshi'). of object::; ue)enc1s
U:lcn the
. "
10
A s':orr' occurs, and
.
l'l:J.I1f:;OU::; 1 y
SJrll
a
tHO
bolt::; of li<;htninG str5.ke
~i'J'.; 11.C:'L.-0.i".1
D._
-
t "0o.nt..·
i LS (\. CL
"n,-1
n
,.
by "sirnll.:ane':lUsly"?
..
c<l.sl:~~
r:0llco~.n~· e;~peri.p",.nt
'f\le
U~TL~at
is :;c:t
Dent th.[l·: he ma~7 ::;ce both A and n at tLe ~;ar'.e tif'le.
on a
tr,~:i.n I:lOv:i.n~~ fr('rJ
r.ilS
30 it
ourse:~vcs
tl~e
.'1
Ob~,erver (I
:1.';8i
is
:cnt.
\'/hen
that every coordinate
mo· leI of
;:,ictnres of facts."(Tracto.tus 2.1)
the?icture arc copbin:.d
that
lIt):
its O\·m ?articu1ar tine or reference systen.
The atomic f::lct ;.s a picture. and is
to
seCDS
traclc.
do \.Je r-:can
n to ,\ and also has a mirror a::-r
fract'.('n of a second latcr tLan A.
systen
t','.(!
\i',t~c
n~ality.
"1-le na:c.e
That the clenents of
one another in n. def'.nitc Ho.i represents
objects are conbined Hi th <me ane,tiler.
Tlli::; conne::;.on c.c the elCI-ents or
t~,e
picture is called j,ts
be a defi.nite corrc~S;)Qnr}e;l.ce i.)etm~en ~ and picture.
has alrca:ly sai.d fact is
Q
L)icturc t
"
••
it
rcaC~les
Il:i_tt::;enstein
up to:.t.'f
11
get a sirti.l:~r stater:e;~t frot: \1itt~c,;tcin: "The rcprescntin[;
,1C
rclat:.')p. consists
0=
the coord5.nations of the eleDent~; of tli.c ]icture
or tt'.e tl,lin'.:s. "C('ractatlls 2.151£f)
For Si.nstein the above is
3.
coord ina i:e systCt'l; for ':Ji t t~;cr. .:;tc i pit is a ~,er.'antica:~ i socor ) hisn
related to fact.
itA ,)icturc is aL intcr)rcted fact. "(Tractatus 2.141) and is
cx?rc3sed in a prol)oc'iti.on, "'.fil.e
nancs.
It is a conr,c:-:::on,
0.
elctlcntar~r
conc.::tcn;l·~:i.on,
)rol)OSi.t;Oil cmsists of
0-;: nanes. "(Tractatus -+.22)
The fact and its oL0nizatiop. i:3 repre::;entec1 by G copb:i.l1c:.tion of
natlcs c1enotin:: c(.!rtain objects,
act~ons
or lincnistic rcLlt1.cns, and
thesc CCJTnponcnts of the fact Qre T'cnt.'lll::
I
111e atonic fact
Itdin:~-an-sichtt r'i~:ht
of any synbolisr', but ae:; soun
::l.S
by an :i.n.aGe.
Both
dCGl ,']ith objects devoid
tile fact is C'-x;->ressed in either
concCl),:\lcllization or connunic,:tion
n.n "interprct:'r1" -;:act.
~)ictured
tl~e
IJicture (corre::;pon,ie;1ce) is
'11.1e iso:-:',orpt1:i.sr 01: Hord to object Ls bas Lcally
see that lor;ic (1"a13 only '..;ith ::rannat:i.cal deten::i_nati.ons and not
. , " tnc Hor l'(1.' ,1
'\J1. 1: 11
Ogden
;F.d
ilichc1.rds ('.'x)ressc:d this sane Gtnter'ent in
~:heir trian~le
of 8:/1'1.b01 and referent.
1
Alcxaader 1-k1.s1ml, A :;tudy in ;1itt::;enstein's Tractatus, ~). 53.
12
nBetFeen the synbol an(1 the referent there i_B no relevant relati.on
other th."n an
in:~irect
one, ,..,hich ccns j_sts in its being used by
-,
soneonc to stand for a referent. n,.
Verbal confusion <,rises "'[len the
for then in a "sisn-situntion't instead of 0ealin:-:,
if t:,',is Here true,
in tl,e
to a
hi1vin~;
l~no,n.pd::::c,
As seen
8:-3n::; or
as I,ocl:e Hould have it, '1·?Quld consist
of ,,'ord 3.
representin:~"jicture
3.0
H~tlt
of t;,.Jt Horld as
;>,
tllOu~ht.
"The lo::;ic:l: nicture of t; ( .cacts is the thought. 1t
bl~fore
for
~'lit
,-g
~nstein
The ttcotlGht is
t'tlC fact is i1 thOU;)lt'"llld
e:~pressed perce~)L,bly
.:1 thou~ht
tltrou[;h the senses
for tllcre is no Cartec;i.a;l "i.[urcati.on of :)(Tceivins and. conccl,Jtualization.
different fran th.,t d:ich iS~:~l)re.r::;scd in t~le :~en':;es.
or cate::,;o[':!.z;;t;
1
G.
l.,.
G~cIell
011S
of 00 jec ts and subject:, Secn to be a
~llrt;ler
and I. ;I.. :lid,:lrJs, ~ rleani;10 of l-1c'mi~, ,c). 11.
13
The "lo;::ieal
.J
i.e turc" is
~
"T!le
::';:1
i.ts
si~n throu~;h
e
S0~se
of
t~e ~roposition
Hhich ue c:{press the
thou~;ht
is directed by
I call t:'.e
'::-·;.-jcetive rclat'ol' to the uodrl."CTractntus 3.12)
T~.e :COrT'
Thj_s is
of reality is )ro5ected by tl~e ~)icturc (thou~;ht).
to on0. corn;s:,onl' encc:.
:lere
.:'rojcctic'n is not clearly e:~1)la:Lned; j.t could
. v=- ---
T)rinc ;.1) 1(;8 oE transfortla..i:.ion.
.I
_
...
- ..
-/"7\
~
~~-
--
-
\
~~
'\
/'
\"
~,
,
'
In this project~on ~oth ~ ~ure3 1 and 11 are used, but in (cal in:
;'itn t,1e :rojcct'on of 11 He arc conc(~rned Hit" the :Ei.nal :Corn.
This
be l7:ac1e. into a soU_<:i fi<;ure i_t:;el~ an,} thus aecoDes a startinz.:: )oi.nt
for fl!rtl'er :)rojrctLun.
I'
In ~it~~enstein the rules ofrojcction are
14
oun(~.
i.n tl.'..e ?ro::)Os:!.t Lonal
ropo,-;itio:l:::l
sL~:;n
A
n object.
i_e;
si~~n
r.i;ht bc
si~;n.
In the above fi2:ure the
l'ati.o of lines of 1:1.5.
:l
a n.::n:1C:', and the nane has a ('Erect
"The
confi:~Hra,~i.on
O.r:
rcl.:lt~onshi.)
si:::;ns cc rrespon,ls to
to
t~le
onfi'::;',r,ti.on of oi)jects in Cl ::;tCltC o[ affairc:."CTr:lct . :tus 3.21)
The
's ir:lp1c
si<~n
si;~n"
evelo~r'ent
,:!leiCh corresyon,ls to an object (nane) is called
uhile t':.e
made 1.1?
0:
~)ro?os :>.tional
sir'')lc s;.:-;n:').
si:::-n j.s a r'or-e cor'.' lex
"The nane n',ans the object.
he object is its 11'.e.')L1in~.• " (I'A" i.s the same si~~n as "A") (Traetatus
.20.2)
The 3i::.;n r~ive:l to em oJject or na:~e i::; found in its syr'bolislct,
.ncl t:18 r'.lles of syr.;bt)l i.sm are an ,:crb5.trary system.
It ':!QuId seer. t:'.en that all t:lat ,}ould be needed to -..mderstand
he ~;ense or use
oc
aI' object is to :~noH its na,:;e, but H:'tt~cn.'>tcin
': ent on to sny: "Only .cacts can c:.xpress a sense, a class of nanes
annot. "(Tractatus 3.142)
In other Horci.s, the si~ns (-"lClt:'ces) of an
bject ca:l give no Se;lse unless it stands in certain rcl':'tt:i..onships
o other ;3:'0ns :;.n a pro~osi'i: ~on.
:1.
"Only in the contc:,:t 0;: a proj)o-
Dr(1)O.3 :.tion j_s the i,c;:;cri;)Uon
an objr:ct.
or
(1,
fact; it is not a Hal\e
The ')ro)os:ition is a fUnction of nanes (arbitrar~'
<>'T:bols) uhich " • • • refers to the ~)os:;Lble state ofc-,f:airs in
he 1:orld of pr.rceT)tua 1 e::cped,ence.
nc<:mc;
To understand a :~ropo-
to kncM 1:hat is the case. "(Tractatus 4.02l~)
In order
use. a .'_=jropo3it.~.o~~ an objc:.ct .:~ocs nnt 11Clve to b8 an i.r1L.:cdiate
e cperience~t but it nust be either a pos;;i.ble ~:per:'ence. or an
a rcady verified experience.
This allous a nore free el"i)iricisn
15
thar, ~Iil1 or l1u:-e ",ould aJ lo,v uhich in turn niti~jatcs the plasticity
of the functional usc tL'lat lan;~ua[;e can fulfill.
If 've l~no\l Hhat the sense of a propos i.tion is He l:no~J ,'7hat
act~ons tend either to verify or falsify that ~roPGsit;on,
but if
He are not able to tal~e a ste~' in eicher ,1irc:cti.on He have failed to
to "refl:::ct reality".
In !'he Blue ant1
fan-Jell
t~1.e
3rmm Bool:s
'~taterent:; hav:.n:~ ,10
propositLons ;-\re
idea
"real" referent ann the latter [laving
tautolo:~:ccal
fror' thc:_r ::efinLtions, e.
;lit'o:<~ensteLn c1ev,~loped tl~e
~;.
in tl1..::lt they derive their
r:>~aning
".All bachelorfi arc male and
sin:~lc."
coherencC', or conc;istency Hhile r;mpirical pro)0,si.t:OW3 arc based on
i.:act
an(~
not ;'lith tll(
"The ·)ictur,c
rcprcs~r.ts
it
or tile [::(ct.
"There
'.8
no picture ",hi.ell is a ilrior:
~rue.'t(Tract<1Lus 2.225)
This il'lplies that it. oeder to havr:: ;, 1()CL~:11 picture the }ro;Josition
of vcri.fic:1tLon is . . ll~':nm;nL:c'l the '.,)ro.')osition
i~- nnt
'1'1'
"r~toorl
-,
, , '-""
'-'
.
!Jitt:~C:lstei.n is correct i.n sa:'in~; tle trutl: ot- fnlsity of a l?ro~;oGition
16
is not nl~cessary in the cosnizo.nce of a )ro)osi tion, but the
principle. of
In his
ver~.fic.·:t:i.on
t[lr~crJr
or
:~no~,m
"ust be
d(~;3Cri,)tjon,
if there is
;:t
full under-
Russell re.:llize(i tllat 30ne
jJroj)osi.tLons denote clctllal objects '.:liile otb.ers descrj'.be certain
entities that mayor Tc..?:,r not have existence.
He 011 so supported,
or covered up for, his lo:;i.cal ator.ist" by
su~;;;e3tin:::;
ontclo-.:~.cal
in nnture.
are o.bout synbols a'I(; are not
syr:bols are used as
j
i)roposi.t: ons
·;l~tl:Genstej.n
f they arc the actual referent then L\e trinn::)e
of associ.ation is darLcned; it should be realized that tLe syrools are
only arbitrary.
pro~)()sition
In
~.;j.tt~/;'l.stein' 3
corres;)onClence theory :)£ truth a
is true if it reflects reality, but ,:h,1.t is
;;~
false fact
one t:;;<t rcflcctfJ .[;}l::;e reality?
"If one do.:.::s not observe tli.at propos i.tions have 2. sense
inde.pcndent of the i:acts, cne cn.n casi 1y believe that:
truth and fals:i.ty are tHO relati.ons betT:!een c.5-:::ns and
b,j.nss s :;3nificant F:Lth equal ri~:hts. One "ould then,
for exar'p1e, say blat "pit si~;nifics in the true Hay
1-71'L:"t ft_p" si:~ni.fi.c; i:-l the Eo.lse '-.'ay, etc. "(~~
4.061)
Hegative facts do not e:::ist for propos iL.on~> are ooitive in
nature.
1'1.1C :)roposit:·.on "_~)tt clcscr:i.bes the sane fact tlk'lt " "
ch:lracteristic of its sense (- -
1)
= p)
The ~Jro)os i.t ion "P" and
"-p" l"k~ve opposite seilses, but to then correspon,;s onc and tIle
saGe renlity.It(Tractatus 4.0621)
Here \vitt~'n3tein shouI:l lk'lVe
said "fact" instead of reali.ty for the :'rocess of nC::;Qbo:1 refers
to the synbols in a prOp()~3:i.tj.cn or to a pro~)03i.tion and not to an
object in rC21ity.
,.
;-lc arc IeaEn:.:
\7 i .th
f<1ct;~ and not reality (dinG-
::>ro~) 08 :;. t ~·.on =~UIJ~)~r
4
Prol)o:;it:~on ~:':r::iJcr
5
17
an-sich) ..
"John is here." states tl1.at a nc.r~30n or class is inclUt 1 cd in
the clas:3 of here while tt_p" stGtes Uw.t John ::.s c:~cludeJ. fron the
class of "h(ore".
p
nottl -:ro')osiLons r~2lcct or ,)icture tilat John Has in a certain
;:>lace,
~)llt
::lGaLn He l:ave dpalt \-lith John not
:tS
an iso1Llted
naDe
but as a fact.
The rclc,ti.on b(:tHcen realit? (din~--c.n-sich), rr::aJ.it~r (pllcnOl:cnal),
fact, yro')osition, and thou::ht i::; a',.::i.n to Ber::eley's fanous dictun
"Esse c::;t pcrci:)i".
For
~JOnethin3
to
:JC
l:..:.'lDlm it Dust be expressible
I
in a pro:)os: tion, ane in a pro::>o,-:it.Lon the object ,1enoted becones a
fact
han~;ing
in a certain \-lay.
i"or a t1liw to be l:nOlffi i.n i::'self is
absurd for ea ...,,' soon as it con(,s into
tl~
field of ?crccption of an
inrlividual it tal:es on a certain structural relat ~_onshi? beconin=.; a
fact.
Real i ty
(l:no~vr)
con; i;;t J 0':
~r1ct::;
ullich is the Ge.dzmkc
:3ince the fact is a tllOu;;ht, rC'-8.1ity becan2- nc.nl;.'1.1 ac:
t~le
(thou~ht).
idealist
uould h..:lve it; l)ut o.:=:ain sj.nee the )ro)osition is vcri.fi:c1 er1.)irically
the 1!i'.2nj.n:::; is eMpirical.
This is a seerlin:~ contradicti.on, bllt this
resolved by Kant, ic basic:,lly correc t Hi th a Ii t tIe r'o rc ;:;crutiny
Hhich Hill be t2::en later on in the paper.
Involved Hithin tllC nC~;<1t ;.Oil.rocess is :-littGenstei.n's fanous
truth function of u:'olecular )roposit:i,on't.
Th.e min thes i.s nunber
five states:
5. 0
"Ti~e =)ro;::lOs ;.tioi1 is
pro?ositioTl.:J."
tl
trl1th function of r:le:entary
1';
?ro:1ns·:t::.on ,'ur,lJcr 5
}?r0)O~':_t '_071 :·u··)cr 6
J?rc~ _O~; :-_ -:: ",0:1 ~ \lr1;)er 7
1'h.e.se :Jro?osi.tions are cO[1;Jlex in nature, and are nar1e up of
propo;::;~tior:c;
eleDentnry
(ntoD'ic [ncts).
Dy a trutil funcL.on
substitut1.on instnnc(s in an elencntar?
the)rol)()s~tion
hypothesi.s ever/
can be said to be
sub:;ti_,~utj_on
~)roposi.ti0n
l~no\m.
6.0
1:1'-:1 y
If in order to verify a
instance had to be tested e:lpirically
no hypo::l"cesis Hould be v:.:.rifi2d, but llith
hand !:',e t Lev]
are ':noun, then
th~
truth te.ble a short-
be us cd.
"'.Gte s:enera1 forn of the truth function is (p,"::,F(i;».
the ::;ener.:ll forr' of ~)roposition."
?roposition nu!:'.bcr s::.-·: states that tile gener.:l1 forr] of
2.
This
pro}o~;i-tion
is an ntonic f~ct (Z) with a set of truth functions, i. c. true or
false, applied to j.t.
-E----------'l-----------.-.--p '-'-/-- -- --. -.-"-. -:--12-----------T
T
T
F
F-
F
T
r
ProI>o~3it!on nun0(~r
7. C
r
-,
seven state::;:
'''Jllat ,'e cnnr:ot spec:
consisteni: TTit:, onc':~ UCe of
S;7[;,
f:
p
<l
of, He
nu~;t
be silent about. It
s·,.-'pbol i:l a l".. n.··.·,u~!,":c,
t ".11,
.-""_'~" '1~
'. ,
... '. ·-tr'enc-teJ'l
-.S
'-'
-1
there is only one nc.;min::, to
f'c
:! ro,:, os , ticn.
Thi:::'l·~a::'n i::: in line
If He are not 2bl~ to sDe.a:~ cle:,rly then the Usc of the word is
It.e
T"
~:tatE'r:cnt
"I
L::~l
ix:prop,:r
i~
his p3in."
us~
nut ncnnin:.Eul for the cO'1text
of "feel" and "his 9ain".
rev'~!:11s
1'1.0 '!ol:-c1 "pain"
an
OnCOT'1~)aS3eS
not only the con,3ciu:snoss of the feolin::;, but also the i_',lea of
crentin~
stimulus
0.
pain.
sorle occurrence to C.:1use
t',1C
feclin:j; therefore, one cannot feel
"his pain" unless he nlsoLs n::act'n::; to the s"me stinll'!s, and if 30
~le
Houl;l be .cec.lin::; 1:,is <X.Jrl:Jnin Hhich in tho only ne,tnin:; to
srat:18ar or
cont r~l,c.~ c: t
lo~ic,
:,{))1S
in our
reflc:ct:i.n~;
:;t:l tencnts.
reali::y and yet
l'ho remai.n 1 p-r of thi.s ,1<J.per Hill
ilLo().c
.
1 1 s on 1y
(ea
' "ellc
Hl.' tI!
ques-:,;e>n of reality; it
lVitt~~en;;tein
fl • • •
lo:~ic
;~iscuss
lo~~ic
is t1:.r;
controllin~:~
does not deal Hi.th reality.
t':le)oler:ci.c an(} try to
"'·'T.")ol"·"f'
ru 1 ;:s Of:~ ".
,,_
- " , t . ,,1 ,
is n0rely t':,,; corl:3i:,tcnt 11s.e of our
thct lo::).c ",as a "nortclat i.ve
:~c 1.('.l1ce".
In other
~:or,1.s,
Jut nust nn1:' ·'ShOH".
lan::ua~;e, nnd since
HE:
c:on ncv(',r Get outside of lal1~,~u~~;c, He
--------'------------------------1
C:)l
Ale::and.er l'Jas10H, •• ;~tudy ~ )itt~en,~teints Tractatlls, P. 113 •
..,
-
'-Ibid., ". llL~.
.
The
as ,lj.tt;:','-:.nstej".n c'!ll;; it, reveals incon:;istencies and
He nOH h..c1ve arr;ved at the problcl" tb.3.t
factor in
Jain.
only
20
ric,scrLbe our lo1.rc~~H:12;t~ (uor1d), e • . •
He can neVer say (as (Ed the
the lad::er
~voulf
b~
HC
cam'ot say uhat electricity
tra(F~::.011il1:l.sts
t1nsturdy and sh.1.;:Y.
in
de[:.nit:~on
'rho.
tl1e mcasnrin::-:sticl:; its use is an e:ctens;.onal
factors
j~nvolved.
histor;T as
NeH
~.]ell
<1:3
t~e
Give:> t::e
:.• e. biolo":y, P,lY3"-CS,
u~;e,';
thc 'cleanin'
there iE' a
,:>,'0
~llanti2iCC1tioTl o[
r'eanin~;
of a
~]Qrd
cor~ron US;-l~.;e,
etc.
,~erived
~enerality
the
entymolc,~ical
connotat ;_ons and c1enotat;ons of that Hard.
SUS:'C'3ts thlt t:-le "u:-::e" is the "nean:Ln;:;".
:!.s not
::let:; as does
TIl2. Oxford .snglisilJictionary Gives the
~~ Dictionar~r
~)oints,
f~rC'pr'ar).
The
frol21 different stand1'1,.c later ;J:Lttgenstein
In use the entire defi.ni_ti.on
of inclusiveness or' e::clusiveness in
fror' it:, use.
This fact is supportcd by oftcn
nisuncer;;toocl sentences or ::trrcur;cnts uhich 3eem to stand on defi:li te
J
.
bei.l1~
'cl.se(~,
IJe [.re determined by t~le 10:::;> c of our lan'~:ua::;e.
"The.
definitions or norns tIl·:t in actllalil:Y are not
[1et.:nhy~;i.c2l
i. c. certain
or ethical st::ttene:lts. *
apl'~-
-_c,:ltion
of lo~;ic c1ccLles "hat clencntary sentence:: t~lere are."(Tractatus 5.357)
In other "ords, by lle::tern trCld:: L.ons in 10:-:',ic the classes of ,,_,\.If and
contracFctin::. the 1 a;,' of the exc1udr:'d niidlc.
vcrificr!.tLon ;:>rincip1e is a (ktert:1inat::_o~:
0:::
LikeuL.se :ichich' s
the: Horlrl.
The veri.ci.cation
pro1)osit:i.cns" o.re er"~)ir:Lc:llt therefore, 0.11 that has been 3ai(~ is
...\
o "",~l..
.)
1.8
'. »en
thou;.h
it is
_
~-"
:1
ta12tolo:~"
__,_
:it acts
,'1S
a non:, ane. thus
as a b.·,s :.3 for fu.rther :lction.
"Lo:~ic
(Traeto.tlls
precede.s ever:' c.xperience that sonethinr; is so. tt
5.5S::n
uh:icll cert:1in
2rLor to an e:·:perience the :)rooo.1>ly Itcases" in
n[\nc~
(objc;et3) can occur i.n
certain
rcl~tonshi}
arc
"John is here. It is one instance t.;rhere the
"possible" contextl,al
rel:1tionshi~)
in our
lo:~ic
can oce: ur.
"John
is cone.", "John is third." are all ')ossib1e "cases".
the sum of sf'uare." has no nca:'.2.n;, or referent i.n the field 0':
the n:,ne:: "hard",
"squilo'e" ::a:1not a~\)ear in th:~s ~)articular
"SllP",
fj
Q...
~----"t:L
"To ijercei.ve a corm1e:~ pc;>.ns to :lcrceive tic;::t its const:.tu.ents
are cor.bLned in such and solch a i.'a:'. "(Tr:1ctatus 5.5422;)
shmv!1 above the cube nay be seen Hit~.; linr:s b-b
[j.;
t.:c -::rnnt,nd
pussibl._ \".~ys to connect the ~)art', C'f the cl!~et uuttllcoint to
be nade is th:1t the '~o3:;ibi.liti.:·2 .'rc postUl:ltcc1 ~rior to an actual
e::q)erienc:e.
As I~ant 's "cate:::;orf.cs of the nind" (~eterr'ille-::': ti:e "fon~"
drcH the cube!
f01T'1.!la
~;'!lS
')
2)
A- + B' ::: c-· is tnlc occ;:11':;c nrior to a possible
)ostulat<:d truc.
22
Russell <lnG Fre::;e deve.loped is nonsensical to vlittr.;en;,tci.l1 [or
lo~~ical propositions alrcady say they ,ere true or st.:1I1c1 as if they
Here true.
can be ,'.(~ci.ded at all by lo;;ic can be ,1ecided off hanll."(Tractatus
A ,[ue:3tion Hhich~a113 outside of the field of our IOf~ic is
5.551)
seen to be nonsensical as uas t~le pro~osition "llard i8 the sure of
square."
In our proposit:Lon for-pation He iJlace nanes of objects in
certaia
j~clat:_ons
te· other
lO~1;ical
constants or connectives in
order to shml a rela.ti.on to ano'..-.her claGs.
"All r.1 en are e'o1'tAl.",
a univer;;al afi:i.rmat.ive proposition, has the subject tern (nen),
is understood to say the class of nen is included in the class of
mortal and yet if He tried to convert tree
sensl~
Houlcl not be obtained.
~)ro,)o3i ti,n
"All reortals are
~~e.n."
the class of mertals is i.nclul ed in the cla33 of
nortal t!-.ings are
occur in our
~
men; therefore, this
!~en,
tlle ::;ame
says that
b1.J":: all
relat;·_onshi~)
cannot
lan:~;ua~;e.
In rodcrn structural linGuistics and t1'a113forLlationai ;;rali1L",ar
nonsensical Hord'3 are used in a sentence pattern toiel"onstratc that
r:mch can be discovered of sentence ncanin~ ncrely thro'Cli:;!l the forn
Hit'i:l.out a
rean:_n.~:f111
skei ttcr:3. It has
deterr·_nations.
A.
referent. *
deC.;1i te l":l('.anin::-; by certJ.in 10::ic:::1C~ra)C:r.l~tical)
l-~ey
,!ords snch as "the", "have", or tile "-ed'I are
signs in ~u~Gest~n~ )roper re12tional £unctio~3.
The propositions dealt ,Tith ';e.re in t1,e ind icative t:ood Qnd if
*t':ote:
Sec any of
tt~e
books '..'rii:ten by Paul Roberts.
23
the:! Here in other moo,~ s t:l(~y Here translated into~ndicntive nood
If the lanGua~e of
proryositions as did Garna) in his metalansuage.
~Jit1:~enstei.n rirrors real i_ty :~n a descriptive ,ray t'llen s~ntences in
other Doods rnlst also Jescrihe reality.
1.
2.
3.
"You 1 ive here not-'.
Live here nGw!
1
Do you 1 ive here nOH?"
The fir.'.;t sentcmce in t>.c.i,n'~, iC[ltive f:1ood is able to b,~· verified and
1.8
in t:,e 'inperative nood and the third in the interro:3<ltj-ve nood.
It E:eems tllat the descri~)tiv<" content
j_s
the same for all three and
yet the '::leanin:::: or Sense a:)pears to be di,fferent.
In 'f<litt[/:on"tein's
terminoloS'! tllcre should be an c.ler'entar~T ,)roposit: on of l·,l1ich the
ahove rolecular proposition is derived, bllt this is on the
.l.ssun;Jt;"-:Jn tL'lt all three sentences r>.rc c1cscr i .ptive of the snne
"c:l.se".
The
:::entC~lCC
would .:llso reve.ql
transrorT"nti.onn.l fumulas of Paul ,{oberts
rtk(,rI~el"
3en':ence mTnber one
~·-;.tr'
sentence.:;.
seel~'S
to Jescribe a state of af Za irs, but
t.he indic,l.tivc. pro:>ositio:l (nutbc.r one),
. ."
th.:lt
In other
~'lOrds,
~ut
sayt': "I desire
thclroT)osition is dis;:;uised to C1.r'Jpear
thC3C1t'lC in d,,"script ive content, b"t QctllQlly 1.,', ab·;yut a desire of
ind i.<>ltive of either yes or no, and
Roberts'
tran,)forr~nti
a~.~a;_n
is in aCCOrdC1l1Ce ",ith
Jnal Tule.
"AT)rocess accot')anyin:; our Hords one rci:.)lt call tile "proces., as
s:s>ea!~
Hi tt~.,;cn::;tei~Tractatus,
,,, .
157.
the Hords;
24
IJcallin:; is li1~c
• • • •
ser;tence.
<1:1
arrOH puintins the c.lirecL.on of a
It differs fror a :;i~;n i.n that the :>iGns tend to ::orp
"
c:::pressJ_ons,
que:> t"1-0'1S, e t c.
Prom
the totality
_
. of si,~n~ the
0
op,,~rati.oT' of adcFtion, an0. yet the oc)~-ration is not
all
opcrat:Lon until
t11e Si~'1 l:.as be'2.n u3".d ~vith a conplcteo operation uhich :~s 1 ... 1
= 2.
"Lansuage ,,;aI"18S are thr:: forns of lan::uase '.lith ,.fhich a child
bc~;i.n:3 to mal:e use of ,lOrJ:3.,,2
"~;:me"
the rul
Tile study c,f these :~amcs i_s the
is lccTned as a child ')1 ays Hith
'3
<1
nC17 toy; 1.n tl',is sense
oE ~rannar are etlpiric;ll, i.rJt a,'3 tIle prltterns becor:,e
ri,e KcmtL:.n catcc/)rips of spn.cC' and t
of the c;:cludecl Liddle" is
R
iXK!
are not i:mal:e as tile. "law
leArned statelccnt, and yGt aft8r (1e.:11inc;
Hith space and tire in OUr st.:1terents t:"le proper uf;aSc or :::;.:1ne is
He [l';aJ_n appear to be faced 1J5_th the
lead to confus 1.on.
~)roblen
Wittccnste;.n says, itA nane
of analytic a iJriori
s:~:niLes
...,
an elene:-.t nl' reality." 3
used if it i_s
1
"
Luc1~·!l.::'.
2~Of
S'x)~)ose,"
;
to corres:lond to the object -
"
;'ht tr<;enstei n, The Blue and ]rrn.,n Books,
only what is
rJ.
If
<-
illicitly
•••
3.5.
'). 17.
3 L U,i I ..
,·i·.
_" '.11.- t tc;en 3te 1_n,
PhilosODhical Investiz,;ation.s, ). 29.
the
25
" "Lt~ use 1n
.
t'~e 1a nr'n
roe It
OL~ a wor dLS
~ a~ •
n2anin~
1
The ·....L ulc'.s of 10',- :ic
are not innate, but ;"~re lC2.rned as a child in a s~)eci~ic "cane".
It il?i)ears thilt t:,e Lant~.an Itcatc:::ori~slt are dcten~ini..n:i reality
as lan:~u.:l~e, for .!e deeic'p. t~lc.. usc and, therefore, the reanin:; of
Hon'! s.
r:unbers are symbols just as Hords found in a certain :3are
([jeor:v:d:r:/, ari t::r:ct:Lc, cnlculus).
D08S
the nunber T.eClccct reality-?
1.lil1 su;;ested that rl<1t:l0.paticn1 concepts Here enpiricnl, c. :.:;. 1 + 1 ::: 2
concept Has
~)sycholo:;ical
ia Eature.
an interactS.on of the a ~)rj.oriness, and tt~e. a )oste,!:,'·.oriness of
numbers.
ttthin:=;
Cardinal aIle; ordinC1l -·,umber
conce~)tlt,
but
first, secon'~, third,
j
D.'!:'oun~
<1'1(1
2.
theo~'
revolves not arouncl a
"relati.onal conceDt".
fourth refers not to one Qntity, etc., but
s found p-i ther in a forral :;e.rics or in a forl"',u1a re·resentin.': a
part i.cuhlr structure of re lation.
The nur'ber is an abstracti.on and
lOf~
yet Lts use is h21rl in the apjlication of its
Ke~)lcr
in
vi(:.~.!in~
the motS.on of t·hrs
?luralit.y of 1m'inous LlOints in the
nathenntical concept of the ellipse,
vieHinr:: " •
,]a~
h('~avcns;
for the process of reduction and
particul;n" experience;).
lIb"
,
~
..a
it is only '.:he pure
. . . , Hhich transforms
discrete ar;;:;rersate into a continuous syster.1. ,,2
a mU!.ti.tudinous amount of sensat'i.ons
ic.
~'Jhich
Sense data opens
would be cha.os if it l-lere not
~eneralizations
In the process of
this
in abstracting
"limitin~'1
eertain
..
2E'rnst GassLrer,
.
~
;:;ubstance
and Function, pp. 118-119.
26
postulatLons are made in order to idealize a partiClllar.
A boy
stands on a street and tmtchcs his friend race by on a bic2'cle; later
a car drives by while the boy rides the
path.
In the first instance the boyt s
bib~
across the vi.e\vcrt s
s~)eed
on the bi.kc
seene:1 fast, wilile in ti,e second instance it appeared slat·J.
!lotion
as defined never offers a fixed point of reference and yet, ia order
to deal Hi th notion, ',e abstract.
"Notion is not a fact of sensation
but of thou;-;ht; not of "perception" but of "conception".l
AccordinG to i:!ach science should 1:all in the
s~)here
of a
posteriori, and yet ":0 scientific theory is directly related to
?
these facts, but is re.lated to the ideal 1 imi ts, • • • • ,,-
Plato
icteali.zel the sh.ac1ous by )cr:i:ect fixed forns i.n the uni.versal realm,
while Aristotle stLpulate(: "no fort' ui.thout matter, no matter
Hithout i:om".
Both are correct it seens to this author.
Science
deals wi tll facts or objects i.n certain combi.nations, but t(leSe
facts are Generalized into an ideal faIT! as reprcsented by a
T'lathenatical equation.
V=~.
h1-=.
d&.
is the equation for
the veloc i. ty of a novi n~ body around the sun.
:t2Ct
.:1S
It re!,)rcsents :,:h.e
it is p~rr.c~ved a 1"',,1 limi tee1. hy the viewer.
The E~quation makes "no d if'::crence tt if it is not
ap'1lication of loe;i.c determines what exists.
ar
lied, for the
An object ray exist
outside of a languaGe (d~n~-an-sich), but its being nay never be
l:nm.;n bllt merely assl'.rncd~
II' .
~.t
).
121.
2~., P. 130.
I
As soon as thc object beco!r:es ~;art of a
27
vocabulary the rclat'. on a3 detc.l-n1ined by',;erception o'r crar:~ar
creates a netV' unity.
Tims the propositions used ref:h~. ct reality
in one sense and say nothin~ of reality in another sense.
Lo~ie
can never say any thin;' about a reality outside of lan:;uare for to
do so lvould be to create tl:e polemic Descartes 3u~Gested HitL "I
doubt. ,,*
Instead l-)~~ic detern-'ines the reality Hhich i~s verified
through hypothatizati.on or pragr:1atic nethodolorS.
l.Jit-tgenstein, like nany pembers of the positivist school, Has
rebel lin:; a?;ainst metaphysics ,·:llen he \'rote the Tractat1..1S LocicoPhilosopl~.
He tried to set up linits of r1eaninsful
\lhich to him meant tLe limits of his world.
,1
iscourse
In the COl:"ron sense
realism of G. E. Noore he accepted the physical bodies he thouC ht
existed, but these objects existed for t.Jitt;jenstein in an expressible
lo;::;ical field of lanr:uage.
The mirror as expressed by
W_tt~en"tein
in the Tractatus Leg ico-Philosophicus seems one-I"ay, but in act;]ality
the catesories of a
l."m~~ua[';c:
ship objects take.
Si.. nce objects are not meaninr:ful (or even
craomar tend to deten:-i;le tlee relation-
knoHable) in isolation, they are found as facts.
To understand a
fact Deans to see. that its constituents are combined in sud: a pay,
but the ''''lay'' is dete.rni.. ned.
The
forr-.~
of
longer arbi.trary.
lo~ic
is arbitrary t but once postUlated it is no
A sign or symbol for an object is of no (;re.at
concern, but once the symbol has been given, a consistent use is
r.>.andatory..
The meaning of a proi)osition (fact) is its use \.Jhich is
~,
Note: "I can dOUbt all except dOllbti.nz; for to doubt doubti. n~; Hould
be to doubt."
28
determined throu;:;h
tl~e
ap 'lication of a particular InIl[;Uage ::;ame.
The rule:, for the gane are determined by the ,-'layers as -,as the
possibil ties
of)erce~)t;_on
in t,:c dia::;ran of the cube.
t.jittsenstein
traced reality - ,,,hat is the case - to a picture as eXl)rcssed in a
proposit:~on
th(~
;1hile
Hhich is a thouCht.
Reality is both phy::.;i_cal and flcntal,
forns of reality <1re both a i)riori and a iOf:teriori.
1<he "liTitinc" factor imolved in conceutualizat '.on
the bounrlarieG of
Ul12t
deteI1~i_nes
is s2.i(1 to be "meanin:;ful" and "real".
;';chlicl:'s
and C2rnap's verific:,tion theory of t:1p.anin:_: ?rescribes \\That is to be
of vCtl'Je in tile-ir r8f'lity.
er~pir
;_c;
~;l'
Def1onstrability,
are the rules for the er'p:x i.cal
o~jcctivi.t:·,
lan;:.~a~e
and
gane dlile
subjecti.\'ity :md nysticisc nay be the rUles for the r:le.taphysician ' s
gar'e.
To try to ver;_fy a )ro~osition of either Gane by the rules of
t-ae o:)or:i.n:; factor lead:3 to L:isnndcrstandin:::; and nonsen;;ical statement}.
C'n1y the r111c3 of the j)<1rticulnr LraPflar can verify a
-Hoposition for uhat lies outside of one' s
noninal realt:1.
lnn:~u2.~e
falls l_n the
29
131BL lOC;;~:i.PIIY
A.
Books
Alston, 'lillian 2., and Gcoq~e nal:imikian, editors lleo.din:~;3 in
l'II/cntietl-; :':;ent;.lry PhiloGophy. LowJnn: Gollicr·-~1acHillan Limite.d,
1'.163. 783 ?a:'~s.
t
!1.nscorbe, G. "'. .• An Introductiun to ivittgen:iteLn s Tractatus.
London: llutch'.nsonand (,;0., 195').-179 paGes.
Gollancz,
London:
Ayer, A. J.
lS~l~e.
219 pages.
irer ,jrnst :,ubstancc and Function.
In:::., 1953. 465 :.>a=;es.
;:;0.8:;
Co])i.,
Irvjn~ ~r.
Conpany, 1961.
;~instcj.n. Albert.
:khuster, 1961.
2cj!Jlen::m,
;;ijhofL,
::~ i <~,
l1CH
Intro:luct:i.on to LOGic.
512 1)a[~f'.8.
l;e~v ':~or}::
HC\J
l'he <No1ution of Physics.
302 paGes.
York:
Jovcr Publications,
The ;lac;li.lltln
~:CH '{orl:;
:;f.non and
lltrtinus
Inside the Grc,::.t Hirror.
Herbert and ll:l free! )e lIars Ilea ~ ings ~.!! i?:l.lcsop h.i..cal Analys is.
Yorl:: .':.?)l p t n :-t-Ccntur:'-Croft,s Inc., 1949. G2C ;)ages.
Gel1ner,::rn(Ost
pa~;es •
;vor<1s
~
Thin::;s.
Boston:
Beaccn :?rc::;s, E'59.
270
Le.v i.,-;, Clarence Irvin:=; An Analysis of KnoH1e<1~;e and ValuatLon.
LA:allr-" Illinois: rheC;:;""en ~ourt Publishi~: COIC?n ny, 1946. 567
;>ages.
lJas1cH, .\l,~':ander .:! Stu;JL in Ilitt~en8t~ Trnct:atus. 3erkeley and
I,08 ~\n:Y~les: U~iversj.ty Of California .Pres;], 1961. 162 pages.
tread, Huntr>.r Types an,l 2rohler's of philoso?hy.
Ho]t ane: Company, Inc., 1959. 4GO pa~cs.
NeH Yorl::
OGden, C. i:. and I. A. Richards The lIeaninr.; of 1:!e.ani.n3.
Harcourt, l3race,9.nd ~Jorld, Inc., 1946. 362 pages.
Henry
NeH
Yori~:
Ploclll':ann, Geor:=;e Kinb::ll and Jack B. L.1.i!SOn Termn :~n Their
2ro!)Osi.tional Conte.'\:ts i.n Wittgensteints Tra~ls-.­ car:b'Onc1ale,
IlHnois: 30ut1tern Illinois Univers;tYPress, 1962. 229 paGes.
Pole, 0avid The Later Philosophy ~ ivitt:=;enstej.n.
:\thlo1'e Press,- 195G. 152 paGes.
London:
The
30
.3ten".U3, ikik ~Jittr;enstei~'s Tractatus.
Unjyersity Press, 1960. 241 pases.
Ithaca, NeH York:
;.]it>c~~cnstein,
LUi~\,':i<~
The ;31ue and 3rm,m Books.
and Brothers, 1958. --rs5~es.-
Wittgenstein, Luri~Ji~~ i:lot:ebool::s
Brothers, 1961. 13l~S:--
1914-~.
Ne1:V
Ire'" York:
Yorl~:
·;"itt~~en:,tein, Lud'7i~
Philoso,)hical Investi::;;ations,'
lfac:W.llan Company, 1953. 232 ~)ages.
':vi tt~;enstein, LUd"\"i~ Tractatus Lo~ico-Philoso~)hic us.
Routled::;:e and I(e2.~an Paul Ltd., 1955. 207 ~'aGes.
B.
Cornell
Ik'1r)er
H...1.rper and
~;e"
York:
London:
:'faS<'l.2:inc \.rtic1es
2eircc, C. S. "lIOH to HL'1I:e Our Idcas Clear."
lfonth1y. 12; January, 1373.
Popular Science
Robertson, Robert B. "2aith, 3cientific and Othenvi_se. It
Vol. V, ~o. 1:51-53; Winter, 1964.
~.
The