New answers tagged

2

Eilenberger completely dismisses what Wittgenstein called "the mystical", which both lies outside of the boundaries of what can be said and still is tied to the problem of life. Let me present a non-positivist reading. I think Wittgenstein outgrew Russel at that point already, and Eilenberger is confusing "the world" in an ontological ...


0

"only things about which we could meaningfully speak could be significant for our own lives. These were things that could be proved to exist using the methodical foundation of this essentially scientific vision of the world—logical analysis. That is, so-called facts. But Wittgenstein was able to show that the truth was in fact precisely the reverse. ...


3

Let me give the full citation: "Rudolf Carnap: Intellectual Autobiography" in The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap, edited by Paul Arthur Schilpp, The Library of Living Philosophers, vol. 11, Open Court, La Salle, III., and Cambridge University Press, London, 1963. You may wish to search the Web for the mentioned book, somewhat poor quality pdfs of it ...


4

See Vasso Kindi, Wittgenstein and Philosophy of Science, into Hans-Johann Glock & John Hyman (editors), A Companion to Wittgenstein (Blackwell, 2017), page 589: Wittgenstein had studied science and engineering and appreciated the rigor and sharpness of the scientific way of thinking. It was Wittgenstein who dismissed Carnap’s scientific interest in ...


Top 50 recent answers are included