Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus / Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung [Ludwig Wittgenstein] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Hard to Find . Tractatus. Logico-Philosophicus. Logisch-philosophische. Abhandlung. By Ludwig Wittgenstein. First published by Kegan Paul (London), Logische-Philosophische Abhandlung Bestehen von Sachverhalten. 3: Das logische Bild der Tatsache ist der Gedanke. 4: Der Gedanke ist der sinnvolle Satz .

Author: Mishicage Mara
Country: Russian Federation
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Automotive
Published (Last): 25 April 2005
Pages: 48
PDF File Size: 7.90 Mb
ePub File Size: 2.20 Mb
ISBN: 344-3-37742-592-4
Downloads: 45333
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mazugore

Amazing read, and recommendable. All potential readers should be acutely aware that this book is a very, very tough read. European Journal of Philosophy. Ludwig Wittgenstein – – Routledge Logisch-philosophizche. One can bounce a ball as many times as one wishes, which means the ball’s bouncing has “logical multiplicity,” and can therefore share the logical form of the game.

Amazon Second Chance Pass it on, trade it in, give it a second life. Archived from the original on Dissertation, The University of Chicago The concept of Essence, taken alone is a potentiality, and its combination with matter is its actuality. Page 1 of 1 Start over Page 1 of 1. These states of wittgensstein are made up of certain logizch-philosophische of objects TLP 2.

At the end of the text Wittgenstein uses an analogy from Arthur Schopenhauerand compares the book to a ladder that must be thrown away after one has climbed it. You may find yourself taking several minutes to read through one short page and then several hours to digest what it logisch-phiosophische you in fact just read. The nature of the inference can be gathered only from the two propositions.

Sign in to use this feature.

Ogden about the first translation. If a proposition pictures a state of affairs in virtue of being a picture in logical space, then a non-logical or metaphysical “necessary truth” would be a state of affairs which is satisfied by any possible arrangement of objects since it is true for any possible state of affairsbut this means that the would-be necessary proposition would not depict anything as being so but will be true no matter what the world is actually like; but if that’s the case, then the proposition cannot say anything about the world or describe any fact in it wittgestein it would not be correlated with any particular state of affairs, just like a tautology TLP 6.


Tractatus logico-philosophicus [Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung]

No keywords specified fix it. Anthony Kenny provides abhahdlung useful analogy for understanding Wittgenstein’s logical atomism: Shopbop Designer Fashion Brands. Get fast, free shipping with Amazon Prime.

Qittgenstein introducing errors like this, it renders it almost unreadable. One of the most influential books of the first half of the twentieth century and alongside Philosophical Investigations sets the standard for analytical philosophy’s immense influence on modern theory. It is comparable to the idea that properties are ingredients of the things which have the properties; e.

As the last line in the book, proposition 7 has no supplementary propositions. The Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein.

Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung – PhilPapers

Find it on Scholar. Top Reviews Most recent Top Reviews. Peter Sullivan – – Grazer Philosophische Studien The technique is based on quantization and combinatorics introduced into statistical models by Ludwig Boltzmann. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Title page of first English-language edition, The logical form can be had by the bouncing of a ball for example, twenty bounces might communicate a white rook’s logisch-philosophiwche on the king’s rook 1 square.

In particular, he viewed transgressing limits where truth could be adequately assessed as entering a realm of nonsense. Why does this matter more than usual? Wittgenstein tried to spell out precisely what a logically constructed logisch-phiilosophische can and cannot be used to say.

Often, though, he refused to discuss philosophy, and would insist on giving the meetings over to reciting the poetry of Rabindranath Tagore with his chair turned to the wall. Wittgenstein seemed to be struggling with ideas he encountered while considering the work of Frege, Russell and Whitehead. Whereas Russell believed the names like x in his theory should refer to things we can know directly by virtue of acquaintance, Wittgenstein abhanvlung believe that there are any epistemic constraints on logical analyses: Wittgenstein drew from Henry M.


The work contains almost no arguments as such, but rather consists of declarative statements, or passages, that are meant to be self-evident.

His use of the word “composite” in 2. This means that all the logically possible arrangements of the pictorial elements in the picture correspond to the logisch-philosophiscche of arranging the things which they depict in reality. The notion of a static unchanging Form and its identity with Substance represents the metaphysical view that has come to be held abhandlnug an assumption by the vast majority of the Western philosophical tradition since Plato and Aristotleas it was something they agreed on.

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus – Wikipedia

Its chief influence, at first, was on the Logical Positivists of the s and 30s, but many other philosophers were stimulated by its philosophy of language, finding attractive, if ultimately unsatisfactory, its view that abbhandlung were pictures of reality.

Wittgenstein’s N-operator is a broader infinitary analogue of the Sheffer strokewhich applied to a set of propositions produces a proposition lkgisch-philosophische is equivalent to the denial of every member of that set.

Since all propositions, by virtue of being pictures, have sense independently of anything being the case in reality, we cannot see from the proposition alone whether it is true as would be the case if it could be known aprioribut we must compare it to reality in order to know that it’s wigtgenstein TLP 4. Whereas for Kant, substance is that which ‘persists’ i.