Pussycat

What sort of truths then? Truths that cannot be expressed in language? Is this what you say? Personal truths? What exactly? Basically my questions and...

Yes, so you have comic writers warn: https://blog.oz-code.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/with-great-power-comes-great-responsibility.png

Is Dennis the Menace a superhero? Or some spoiled brat? At least Captain America is well nurtured!

I am not an expert in comics, but I think that we should have a look at how the concept of superheroes has been developed since the beginning. At firs...

So if ethics has nothing to do with truth-functions, does this mean that no truth comes out of ethics? I didn't say that there was talk of value judge...

It's because you crazy yankees like to play heroes, being a superpower. Saving the world, rescuing the girl and all. Take for example Captain America,...

Yes of course, the numbering is not ornamental in the Tractatus. But if we want to take things from the beginning, chapter 6 begins with :"The general...

Yes ok. So? Why do you see good willing to be a characteristic of the happy man, and bad willing that of an unhappy man? Because they are placed in th...

Lets just say that the Notebook was never written or that it was unavailable to us, and we only had the Tractatus. Do you think that from the statemen...

Yes, which I translated to "is the will fundamental in all ethical theories?". Your disagreement is with theory? Or with fundamental? I guess with the...

Yes, the topic is the Tractatus, but we got sidetracked discussing this question: "is the will fundamental in all ethical theories?". All my previous ...

:) this is not what I meant by what does it say, but ok, I will have a look.

no i haven't, what does it say?

No, once again, it is you that have misunderstood me. I quoted W to make an argument for this particular theory that we were discussing, I didn't say ...

No matter who wins, what is ethical, according to this theory, does not reside in the will itself (good willing does not make it ethical), but is judg...

For this theory I said that the will plays a non significant role, since ethical matters are judged according to pleasure. So if for example our will ...

Yes, I was gonna say Utilitarianism. Something like Russell seems to be advocating in the famouse radio debate with father Copleston. http://www.scand...

But for Kant, the foundation of ethics is the will. Just like you say it is for Wittgenstein. So they might be different, but not fundamentally differ...

Thanks, I will watch it when I have some time.

How are they fundamentally different, since the foundation in the both of them is the will, no?

Ah yes, the will, forgot about that one, this be the last refuge of the ethical man, well until he finds another one that is, but he is running short ...

it's good fun, ain't it?

Ok, and what he does and how he lives can be described by a very certain state of affairs, like we are watching him from afar how he goes about his ow...

I don't think we are anywhere in particular, we are just discussing bits and pieces, here and there.

Right, so how does this "ethical man" differ from someone that is not? If it doesn't have anything to do with whatever he says or thinks, then what el...

Here he is starting to attack also the "thinking" mode of being ethical, besides the "saying". For the "saying", it is clear as rain what he contends,...

What do you think is this chimaera he is referring to?

Watch out! you will get a bad grade. :razz:

And the part where he says that it is a chimaera?

God's will, yeah right! Anyway, you brought me W's lecture on ethics to corroborate your analysis of the Tractatus that whatever is beyond logic, lang...

Yes, but there is no experiential knowledge either. In fact, there is no knowledge at all about stuff like that.

"A Lecture on Ethics", yes, I remember I linked that to Wallows a while back, I don't know what he has done with it. So there W closes the lecture wit...

So where is it that W says that we cannot know God using reason, but that we can know God experientially?

I see no problem with this one, I was referring to your last sentence. But what does "discursively" mean? Rational thinking? So that pure reason or ra...

Mind you that Wittgenstein's friend David (Hume) Pinsent was a descendant of David Hume. A coincidence? But there are no coincidences in logic.

Amity, amity why show you such enmity? after all there's no calamity But I am just trying to be honest here, you understand honesty, right? Honesty's ...

From which you extract: Now where exactly does W. say explicitly in the Tractatus that the things that are not within the bounds of language "are not ...

Lots, like the last comment, "not discursively, but experentially", what the heck is this, where on earth did W say that, or even hinted??

I think that he is doing a good job, but partly. For the other part, its really bad: he makes his own views pass as W's, most commonly they appear at ...

So you see now its purpose?

But later on... So is the Good - ethics - more or less identical than the Beautiful - æsthetics??

It's just that I got the impression from you that you are lacking some basic knowledge in philosophy, when you utter things like "a priori metaphysics...

Sorry man, but this "a priori metaphysics" of yours got me laughing, and now I can't stop! :lol:

What are you talking about? Metaphysics is not divided into a priori and non-a priori, it is a priori only, part of its definition. Saying non-a prior...

Yes, follows Kant, who said that the metaphysical is a priori. So, the metaphysical self cannot be taken to be the subject who experiences, as you sai...

But metaphysics, at the time of Wittgenstein at least, was supposed to be knowledge - or something anyway - beyond experience. If W wanted to redefine...

This is a translation from an excerpt of a greek poet's work that has something to do with anti-natalism: "The pain that began with the resistance of ...

Yes, this is what happens very often indeed. But there are also cases when one actually agrees with someone else, but thinks he disagrees. And this sa...

I was asking about your own thoughts, as you yourself were not very clearly whether these were your own opinions or the opinions concerning those in t...

What is the metaphysical, to you, I mean? Whereas the philosophical I or philosophical self makes sense? What does that mean?