How should we read Tractatus' proposition 6.4311?

Death is not an event of life. Death is not lived through. If by eternity is understood not endless temporal duration but timelessness, then he lives eternally who lives in the present. Our life is endless in the way that our visual field is without limit.

Especially the last sentence?

Specifically, I'm wondering what happens if we say that our life is identical to our visual field. Could that doubling suggest that the death we do not live through is not an event in any world at all?

I've finally figured out, it seems, why I can't imagine my death. That my visual field has no limits, means I cannot incrementally abstract visible objects from it, without leaving the visual field, there all the same; and life! But then, treating the end of life as a mathematical instant, is somehow equally prolematic to my imaging.

  • 1
    Have you considered this in the context of Kant's antinomy of the end of time, and his notion of time in general, as an aspect of human consciousness? If at death you exit time, then you would expect both perspectives not to make sense. It is an event in two incompatible schemata, so it makes no sense in terms of either. – jobermark Jan 17 '17 at 20:02
  • 1
    You're presuming that it makes any sense at all. The trouble with rather vague metaphysical statements like this is that they could mean anything or nothing, neither gets you anywhere. If Wittgenstein had anything concrete to say on the matter he would have spelled it out with rigorous precision such that the conclusion seemed both inevitable and surprising, he was quite eminently capable of doing that. Where he does not is just those areas where he hasn't really got anything of substance to say but his tenacious superstition convinces him that he must say something nonetheless. – Isaacson Jan 18 '17 at 8:04
  • @Isaacson you've my sympathy, but i don't think you shoulr accuse the 20th century's greatest of sloppiness. whether or not that's what your comment amounts to! – user6917 Jan 18 '17 at 16:21
  • Not sloppiness, just lack of concrete utility. – Isaacson Jan 18 '17 at 17:49
  • @jobermark hmm. suppose that the "world" is no event, and death is not an event in my world. what would that amount to? can we die, if both death and its place are not events? by analogy, can something have a mathematical point if it is neither a line nor belonging to a line? – user6917 Jan 20 '17 at 7:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy