Al elaborar la noción de un «estado de naturaleza pura» como dotada de un realidad objetiva propia, Francisco Suárez le iba a proporcionar a la filosofía política moderna la herramienta conceptual de la que los filósofos y iusnaturalistas de los siglos XVII y XVIII que se inscriben en su estela se valdrían para desarrollar su pensamiento político y jurídico. En este estudio rastreamos dos de las fuentes medievales de las que Suárez se sirvió en la elaboración de su noción de (...) un «estado de. (shrink)

I discuss the account of logical consequence advanced in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. I argue that the role that elementary propositions are meant to play in this account can be used to explain two remarkable features that Wittgenstein ascribes to them: that they are logically independent from one another and that their components refer to simple objects. I end with a proposal as to how to understand Wittgenstein's claim that all propositions can be analysed as truth functions of elementary propositions.

The original version of the article missed to include an acknowledgments. The missing information is provided below.

The article argues for a contextualised reading of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. It analyses in detail the role that use and application play in the text and how that supports a conception of transcendentality of logic that allows for contextualisation. The article identifies a tension in the text, between the requirement that sense be determinate and the contextual nature of application, and suggests that it is this tension that is a major driver of Wittgenstein’s later ideas.

En el presente artículo, me centraré únicamente en la ontología del Tractatus porque, a pesar de ser uno de los temas que abandona después de 1930, tiene dos aspectos que quisiera resaltar de manera especial: su carácter relacional, y su afirmación de la contingencia del mundo. Considero que ambos son de interés en sí mismos por su carácter inédito, pero creo, además, que es posible establecer sugerentes relaciones entre ellos y algunas posiciones contemporáneas, tanto de las ciencias naturales como (...) de las ciencias sociales. En el primer caso, haré referencia al libro recientemente publicado de Friedrich Hülster, Introduction to Wittgenstein´s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Para el segundo, tomaré como punto de partida Radical Uncertainty, publicado el año pasado por John Kay y Marvyn King. (shrink)

Perhaps the most important work of philosophy written in the twentieth century, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus first appeared in 1921 and was the only philosophical work that Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951) published during his lifetime. Written in short, carefully numbered paragraphs of extreme compression and brilliance, it immediately convinced many of its readers and captivated the imagination of all. Its chief influence, at first, was on the Logical Positivists of the 1920s and 30s, but many other philosophers were stimulated by its (...) philosophy of language, finding attractive, if ultimately unsatisfactory, its view that propositions were pictures of reality. Perhaps most of all, Wittgenstein himself, after his return to philosophy in the late 1920s, was fascinated by its vision of an inexpressible, crystalline world of logical relationships. The posthumous publication of other writings has, therefore, only served to reawaken interest in the Tractatus and to illuminate its more neglected aspects. David Pears and Brian McGuinness revised their translation in the light of Wittgenstein's own suggestions and comments in his correspondence with C.K. Ogden about the first translation. In addition, this edition contains the introduction by Bertrand Russell which appeared in the original English translation. (shrink)

It is argued that Wittgenstein’s remarks 6.2-6.22 Tractatus fare well when one focuses on non-quantificational arithmetic, but they are problematic when one moves to quantificational arithmetic.

Wittgenstein Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus’un sonunda, kendisini anlayan okuyucunun, söylediklerinin saçma olduğunu göreceğini söyler. Eserin bu paradoksu eserle tanışan hemen her okuyucu için bir kafa karışıklığı vesilesidir. Eğer eserde dile getirilenler saçmaysa bunların saçma olduğu da dahil olmak üzere eserin dile getirdiklerini ciddiye almamak gerekir, eğer eser ciddiye alınacaksa söylenenlerin saçma olduğunu kabul etmek gerekir. Eserin bu paradoksunun nasıl ele alınması gerektiğine dair hatırı sayılır bir literatür vardır. Bu çalışmada, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus’taki bu paradoksun, saçmanın sağaltıcı işleviyle değerlendirildiğinde eseri anlamayı engellemeyeceği (...) fikri savunulacaktır. Bunun için öncelikle genel olarak Resim Kuramı’nın ana hatlarından söz ederek Wittgenstein için saçmanın ne olduğunu anlatacağım. Daha sonra, Wittgenstein için saçmanın işlevinin ne olduğuna dair iyi gerekçelendirildiğini düşündüğüm fikirlerden söz edeceğim. Son olarak, saçmaya işaret edebilmenin ancak saçma ile mümkün olduğunu, Wittgenstein’ın bu yolla yaygın bir yanılgıyı sağalttığını ve dolayısıyla saçmanın sağaltıcı bir işlevi olduğunu iddia edeceğim. (shrink)

Richard Janko's acclaimed translation of Aristotle's _Poetics_ is accompanied by the most comprehensive commentary available in English that does not presume knowledge of the original Greek. Two other unique features are Janko's translations with notes of both the _Tractatus Coislinianus_, which is argued to be a summary of the lost second book of the Poetics, and fragments of Aristotle’s dialogue On Poets, including recently discovered texts about catharsis, which appear in English for the first time.

Le premier Wittgenstein expose dans le Tractatus une philosophie des sciences marquée par le conventionnalisme complété d’un certain vérificationnisme assuré par la logique de l’ Abbildung. Pour autant il ne développe aucune idéologiste scientiste. A partir de 1929, sa philosophie prend un tournant grammatical : la « grammaire » de la science comporte non seulement les lois logiques, mais aussi la partie théorique des sciences de la nature. L’assimilation des grandes théories (Copernic, Darwin, Freud) à des « vues synoptiques (...) » rassemblant une quantité de phénomènes, comme les paradigmes de Kuhn, n’empêche pas Wittgenstein de donner à sa philosophie le tour d’un incontestable réalisme (au sens de Cora Diamond). La dernière partie de ce texte essaie d’apprécier, à partir de Wittgenstein, les différences et les relations entre science et philosophie dans le naturalisme contemporain. (shrink)

Si sente spesso parlare di due diversi Wittgenstein, corrispondenti ai due capolavori del filosofo austriaco: il Tractatus e le Ricerche. Il presente saggio mette in questione tale netta distinzione – e qualsiasi altra – mostrando come il pensiero di Wittgenstein sia in una costante e graduale transizione. La tesi principale è che soffermarsi retrospettivamente sulla fluidità di questa transizione, esaminandone i passaggi fondamentali, può essere più illuminante che isolare assunti teorici utili a “contare i Wittgenstein”. In particolare, dopo una (...) discussione di alcune idee del Tractatus, l’articolo si soffermerà sulla transizione dai concetti di proposizione elementare e sintassi logica a quelli di sistema proposizionale e grammatica, mostrando come, attraverso un costante ripensamento del concetto di forma, Wittgenstein giunga a identificare il significato delle parole col loro uso effettivo nei nostri giochi linguistici. (shrink)

Tractatus Politico-Philosophicus (Political-Philosophical Treatise) is an original work of political philosophy that aims to establish the principles of the good state and of a happy society, and to open up new directions for the future development of humankind. It is also, in part, a response to the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus of Ludwig Wittgenstein. The main objective of the book is to demonstrate the necessity of, and provide a guide for, the redirection of humanity. I argue that this paradigm shift (...) must involve changing the character of social life and politics from competitive to cooperative, encouraging moral and intellectual virtues, providing foundations for happy societies, promoting peace among countries and building a strong international community. (shrink)

Reading the Tractatus. And appreciating it The reception history of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus displays an impressive and persistent diversity. This paper explores possible sources of that diversity and locates them in different takes on the text and its context of origin, and in different perspectives of the readers. This hermeneutics is illustrated by a comparison of two views on the importance of ethics for an understanding of the Tractatus: that of Cora Diamond and the one developed by (...) the authors in previous work. (shrink)

Ludwig Wittgenstein’s _Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus_ is among the most ambitious and influential philosophical works of the early twentieth century, and in recent years it has again occupied a central position in discussions of Wittgenstein’s philosophy. Written in an austere and meticulous style, the _Tractatus_ addresses questions in the philosophy of language, logic, and metaphysics, and, according to its author, provides a solution to all the problems of philosophy. This Broadview Edition contains the original English translation by C.K. Ogden and Frank P. (...) Ramsey, annotated and revised by the editor for improved accuracy and clarity. Appendices include important material by Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, as well as excerpts from Wittgenstein’s other writings. (shrink)

Perhaps the most important work of philosophy written in the twentieth century, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus first appeared in 1921 and was the only philosophical work that Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951) published during his lifetime. Written in short, carefully numbered paragraphs of extreme compression and brilliance, it immediately convinced many of its readers and captivated the imagination of all. Its chief influence, at first, was on the Logical Positivists of the 1920s and 30s, but many other philosophers were stimulated by its (...) philosophy of language, finding attractive, if ultimately unsatisfactory, its view that propositions were pictures of reality. Perhaps most of all, Wittgenstein himself, after his return to philosophy in the late 1920s, was fascinated by its vision of an inexpressible, crystalline world of logical relationships. The posthumous publication of other writings has, therefore, only served to reawaken interest in the Tractatus and to illuminate its more neglected aspects. David Pears and Brian McGuinness revised their translation in the light of Wittgenstein's own suggestions and comments in his correspondence with C.K. Ogden about the first translation. In addition, this edition contains the introduction by Bertrand Russell which appeared in the original English translation. (shrink)

... TRACTATUS DE IMMORTALITATE ANIM Ж. PR 0 OE^MIU M. * Continens intentionem, feu libri materiatn & can* fam intentionis. F rater Hieronymus Natalis, ...

‘Tractatus, since I first read it, has been a constant source of philosophical inspiration to me’ so says Ganguly in the preface of his book Wittgenstein’s Tractatus: A Preliminary. This extraordinary commentary on Tractatus is unique in the sense that it has discussed all the commentaries available at that time while examining and critiquing, wherever necessary, the commentaries as well as the original with utmost passion and sincerity. His approach to the author was feasibly sympathetic and sensitive, (...) though he never fails in his duty of being a rigorous critique while examining an apparent inconsistency or weak arguments. As it is nearly impossible to deal with all the contentious topics of the Tractatus that Ganguly dealt with in a single paper, I would like to concentrate only on the fundamental claim of Ganguly that the Tractatus 6.54 cannot really get Wittgenstein out of the paradoxical situation. Hence the paper will be divided into three main sections. In the first section, the paper will deal with the palpable paradox that results from the reading of Tractatus 6.54 and the controversies involved in various interpretations of the paradox. In the second section, there will be an attempt to focus on the problem of description in the distinction between saying and showing, between thinking and imagining, between thought and reality in order to understand the annotation of T6.54 by Ganguly. In the third section, there will be an attempt on my part to interpret the paragraph Tractatus 6.54 in the light of the distinction between Sinnloss and Unsinn from a non-resolute perspective and evaluate Ganguly’s account of the paragraph in question from that perspective. (shrink)

Albert Maslow points out that Wittgenstein dedicated a copy of the Tractatus to Morris Schlick with the following sentence: “ Jeder disese Sätze ist der Ausdruck einer Krankheit ” (Each of this propositions is the manifestation of a disease.) We will try to see some of the treatments to see if the remedy is not, in many cases, worse than the disease. Few philosophical texts have so many material surrounding it as the Tractatus, but and at the same (...) time do maintain such a vast spectrum of interpretations. To the point that one can expect every now and then, exegetical revolutions. Like the political ones, they usually burry the past in its way. An example: the appearance in the 1980s of Wittgenstein's Vienna was a fundamental milestone that showed that it is impossible to dissociate the author from the Viennese intellectual environment. However, attempts have been made to present this new approach as the refutation of the rest, falsely equating the Tractatus with continental philosophy in a book that is really weak in terms of elements of symbolic logic and without any expertise in regard to the philosophy of logic of Frege and Russell, which are essential to understand the context of the concepts in the text of the Tractatus itself and the records of the time. A similar case is the new interpretation that was awarded some ten years later by the North American school: they rightly called attention to the neglect of the essential paradox of the Tractatus of having intended to say what is shown. However, the value of this perspective is lost when the book is treated as the work of a postmodern nihilist, an antimetaphysical dialectician. The same can be said of the interpretation of Raymond Bradley, whose praiseworthy efforts to highlight the Tractarian modal element have resulted in an inadequate Leibnizian framing in his work The Nature of All Being (Bradley, 1992). To show an overview, I would broadly follow the outline of Cerezo (1998), adding and extending his taxonomy a bit. I think Cerezo´s outline is accurate and simple. Cerezo does not take into account contextualist readings or, in any case, it isnt her concern in her Lenguaje y Lógica in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. Let us mention among the ways of reading the Tractatus the empiricist perspectives (in classical version, like Russell, or positivist, like those of Shlick and Carnap ), non-empiricist logicists ( Anscombe, Kenny ), Kantian ( Stenius, Coffa ), metaphysical (in actualist variant, Hacker, or positilist Leibnizian, Bradley), continental (such as Janik and Toulmin ), nihilistic ( Diamond and Conant, Ostrow and his dialectical idea ), and MacGuinn 's elucidatory -ecumenical attempt. David Stern (Stern,1998 ) made a stratification that is not incompatible with the one I point out. 1. The logical-atomistic reading ( logical atomist reading ) of Russell ; 2. The reading of logical positivism ( logical positivist reading ) : with the belligerent antimetaphysical charge ; 3. Metaphysical reading ( metaphysical reading ), like Hacker's, with a logically based idea of metaphysics; 4. The irrationalist reading ( irrationalist reading ) that Toulmin and Janik maintain, for example, or Isidro Reguera, where there is pre-eminence of the religious ethic elements; and 5. therapeutic reading ( therapeutic reading ), which poses it as a kind of infinity joke. We are going to add to the list a reading, which we will call a pathological reading. (shrink)

The paper analyzes the conception of free will defended by the Tractatus, and in contrast to Pasquale Frascolla’s recent verificationist reading of 5.1362, it argues that Wittgenstein’s conception of free will squarely places future contingencies within the boundaries of truth-conditional semantics.

In the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Wittgenstein writes:2.022 It is obvious that an imagined world, however different it may be from the real one, must have something – a form – in common with it.2.023 Objects are just what constitute this unalterable form.As F.P. Ramsey pointed out, in his insightful review of the Tractatus, it is evident:[i]that Wittgenstein is here envisaging a multitude of possible worlds other than the real one;[ii]that Wittgenstein is claiming that, notwithstanding their diversity, all such worlds (...) have a common form; and[iii]that Wittgenstein believes this form to be somehow 'constituted' by the simple objects that exist in these worlds. (shrink)

It is generally agreed that these passages are among the most important to be found in the Tractatus; they give the gist of Wittgenstein 's argument for his atomistic ontology as well as the crucial notion of propositional analysis. It is surprising therefore that most discussions of these entries are cursory and fail to set out the argument in detail.

Je pose une question concernant la place du Tractatus de Wittgenstein dans la tradition éthique. Le Tractatus et la tradition éthique Les remarques que je ferai sont à considérer dans le contexte d'une interprétation du Tractatus qui a été qualifiée de lecture résolue de cette œuvre, ainsi que de la philosophie de Wittgenstein en général Comme l'a écrit Cora Diamond, le Tractatus travaille sur la libération des besoins et des désirs philosophiques, une libération de la philosophie (...) effectuée avec des outils philosophiques : la situation du Tractatus est similaire à celle évoquée dans les Recherches et dans l'œuvre ultérieure, qui se consacre également au projet de se libérer de la philosophie pour le bien de la philosophie. (shrink)

The text of The Tractatus supports incompatible interpretations of a number of key philosophic positions. For example, the book is neither obviously nominalistic nor obviously realistic. Another difficulty is presented by the apparent. incompatibility of Wittgenstein's theses that propositions are logical pictures of facts, and that propositions are truth-functions of elementary propositions. There are several places in The Tractatus where these two doctrines meet head on, but the central one is the set of passages 5.54-5.5422. This paper is (...) an exegesis of these passages and a sketch of Wittgenstein's theory of judgement.In Tractatus 5.54 - 5.5422, Wittgenstein argues that statements of belief, judgement, thoughts and the like are not incompatible with the principle of finite extensionality. The passages contain a brief but obscure reductio on the possibility of non-extensional contexts, and several no less obscure corollaries. In this paper I shall explicate the content of the reductio, criticise a common but mistaken view of these passages, and draw out the consequences of some major doctrines in the Tractatus for Wittgenstein's Theory of Judgement. (shrink)