Banno

That's what this thread is for.

Nice. Thanks.

To be sure, the intent here is to point out that we do not say "He searched the kitchen because the keys were there"; If one knows where the keys are,...

Am I? I did raise it here. Tell me more.

Interesting. Where? I'd like to read it.

Hence showing as opposed to saying is one thing that Wittgenstein carried from the Tractatus into the Investigations.

Why are we doing this? five is less than six; iron oxidises in the presence of oxygen; animals with hearts also have kidneys.

No.

I can explain the rules of chess by stating them; but also there is a way of showing them that is not stating them, but implementing them in the act o...

"I'm certain that the cat is on the mat, but I don't believe it"...

Back to the old chess example. When playing chess it makes no sense to doubt that the bishop moves diagonally. In plotting one's next move, we do not ...

Here is a fact: the cat is on the mat. Here is a statement of that fact: "The cat is on the mat". There is a fact that is named in the statement of th...

Damn. Can't find the ladder to climb back down to your level. :wink: Shouldn't have thrown it away. I didn't say the Tractatus would be easy; I said i...

It's what I do.

Is that you know you are writing in English a logical necessity or a mere probability? I suggest it is neither, and that as a result, there are more t...

It's what the author does next that counts. Do they stop and think or blunder on?

The Tractatus thread would be a good place for @"Kaiser Basileus" to start. Compare against "The world is everything that is the case".

Are you sure?

No. (Edit: a detailed critique of the OP starts at https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/199489)

This puzzles me. I am not aware of any system of logic or mathematics that makes use of "certain" or "certainty" as a term. Rather, they use "true" an...

Not this. The more I think about mental states, and belief in particular, the less solid they become.

Part of what I am doing is exploring the difference between saying and showing. One can't say stuff about the ineffable - but we do anyway. How does t...

I haven't the capacity right now to reply in the detail this deserves, so I will just say that this looks good to me, provided I ignore the problemati...

Might just let your words speak for themselves.

The most coherent proponent of the view in the OP is Feyerabend, in whom I am well-pleased. His view of scientific method is found in the aphorism "An...

I asked which you would choose. I'm not too keen on Pinker either. Seems to me he made his reputation by popularising the ideas of others. But I do ag...

Real things are all concepts? That's not right.

Hm. Yep, I've missed you. There is some relation between someone and their mental state, surely.

IS it the scientific method? I don't agree. Science proceeds by looking and generalising rather than repeated questioning. A scientific approach might...

Well, yes, apart from it's use. Which might be to have you think in terms of use rather than meaning. So we should do philosophy by vote? Is it really...

Did you decide on some suitable understanding of "logical space"?

Much goes unchanged long the course of his thought. Not so atomic facts. Or at least objects. See PI?46 and thereabouts. The grammar built from object...

What about being in pain? It seems wrong to say it is just a state of mind.

Perhaps. The thread seem to be going slowly, so I thought I might add my two bits. The point being that atomism is explicitly rejected in the investig...

And would understanding the Tractatus as it were understood by Wittgenstein at say, the time he mailed the document to Russell, be adequate?

...and yet we choose.

The deeper, logical point I want to play with is that "identity" has all sorts of ambiguity. Consider... ...which had me re-thinking Rebecca Reilly-Co...

Do I reply to this? Wittgenstein showed that meaning lies in shared use. There is a long history of mistaking this for behaviourism. Behaviourism does...

Sure. To be blunt, can the Tractatus be understood apart from the Investigations?

Nor am I. I would point out that if someone's mental state is ineffable, then it is pointless to discuss it. But then we do discuss mental states - wi...

Can one know the mental state of another?

This, as I understand, is an internal position; mental states are independent of what is going on around us. Not sure if this is like being a priori o...

It's the ambiguity, or perhaps the obscurity, of "mental state" that I want to examine. I don't think it's a lack of focus - one can't focus on a fog;...

I'm wondering how useful it is to read in detail a book that was eventually surpassed by its own author. While granting that understanding the Tractat...

even then, perhaps not. There are pelicans, at the least.

There's the problem: giving primacy to your own judgement. Progress happens, regardless of your judgement. When it comes to your own open heart surger...

An ad hom and a denial of facts. Cool. Have fun.

And then he got rid of atomic facts - see Philosophical investigations.

The assumption here is that there is a something that is the meaning of a word; and further, if this meaning-of-a-word were identified, we would all a...

I think this is spot on. I made a very similar point during a debate in a previous incarnation. The argument extends to all who infer the existence of...