Logisch Philosophische Abhandlung PDF/EPUB Ë Logisch


10 thoughts on “Logisch Philosophische Abhandlung

  1. Manny Manny says:

    Donald Trump's latest protestations about having to fight the crooked media remind me of a famous passage from §562 of the TractatusWas der Solipsismus nämlich m e i n t ist ganz richtig nur lässt es sich nicht s a g e n sondern es zeigt sich Dass die Welt m e i n e Welt ist das zeigt sich darin dass die Grenzen d e r Sprache der Sprache die allein ich verstehe die Grenzen m e i n e r Welt bedeutenIn fact what solipsism means is uite correct only it cannot be said but it shows itself That the world is my world shows itself in the fact that the limits of the language the language which I understand mean the limits of my worldDonald I believe I understand what you wish to say Everyone else is crooked; everyone else is a loser; only you are exempt But somehow you are unable to express these self evident truths except in your internal language Frustrating isn't it?


  2. Roy Lotz Roy Lotz says:

    Wittgenstein was deathly afraid of uttering nonsense; whereas I clearly am not—how else could I stomach writing so many book reviews? This book is a work of high art—beautiful austere and sweeping Wittgenstein is self consciously attempting to speak the unspeakable—in his opinion at least—which is why the language is so succinct and severe He has no use for literary niceties flowing prose or extended exposition One gets the feeling that for Wittgenstein writing philosophy is repugnant akin to unclogging a toilet something he would like to get over with as soon as possible Come to think of it the toilet metaphor is especially apt Wittgenstein honestly thinks that the whole of Western philosophy has been literally nonsense and wishes to free the pipes of thought from all the years of accumulated filth And the coup de grâce is that after condemning the philosophical tradition he condemns his own work The Tractatus is almost meant to be like a purgative—you swallow it just to spit everything back up Wittgenstein has fully mastered the precept that the time one spends arguing a point the less likely that point seems His conclusions are so sweeping his sentences so forceful that one is tempted to unthinkingly agree with him Nevertheless after some consideration I doubt that many people accept his conclusions I don’t In fact Wittgenstein’s aforementioned fear of saying something nonsensical may be have limited him It’s almost as if he had a superstitious fear of transgressing the bounds of sense—a superstition all the perplexing because he places its object outside the realm of thought But like most good books of philosophy the Tractatus is rewarding to read even if one doesn't accept its conclusions So read it I say Spend time on every sentence and savor every word and maybe Wittgenstein will unclog the toilet of your mind


  3. Manny Manny says:

    What can I say about Tractatus that hasn't been said a million times before? Crystalline gnomic dense wrong Well I don't disagree with any of that but it would be nice to have an image I ask my subconscious if it can come up with anything and while I'm in the shower it shows me the seuence from Terry Gilliam's 1988 movie The Adventures of Baron Munchausen where John Neville and Eric Idle build a hot air balloon made entirely from women's lingerieI am about to smack my subconscious upside the head for its appalling presumption but suddenly I see that it could have a point Hm yes you are first struck by the amazing chutzpah of the idea and then you are convinced that it can't possibly fly but somehow it does It's obviously crazy but also uite unforgettable And they use it to escape from an apparently life threatening predicament which it turns out was only ever in their imaginationOK subconscious now I see what you mean But don't push your luck too far


  4. Ahmad Sharabiani Ahmad Sharabiani says:

    Tractatus Logico Philosophicus Logical Philosophical Treatise Treatise on Logic and Philosophy Ludwig WittgensteinThe Tractatus Logico Philosophicus abbreviated and cited as TLP is the only book length philosophical work by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein that was published during his lifetime 1921 The project had a broad goal to identify the relationship between language and reality and to define the limits of science It is recognized by philosophers as a significant philosophical work of the twentieth century G E Moore originally suggested the work's Latin title as homage to the Tractatus Theologico Politicus by Baruch Spinozaتاریخ نخستین خوانش سال 2009 میلادیعنوان رساله منطقی فلسفی؛ نویسنده لودویگ ویتگنشتاین؛ مترجم محمود عبادیان؛ تهران، جهاد دانشگاهی دانشگاه تهران؛ 1369؛ در 94ص؛ موضوع منطق ریاضی زبان فلسفه از نویسندگان اتریشی سده 20معنوان رساله منطقی فلسفی ویراست دو زبانه؛ نویسنده لودویگ ویتگنشتاین؛ مترجم میر شمس الدین ادیب سلطانی؛ تهران، امیرکبیر، 1388، در 324ص؛ شابک 9789640012468؛ چاپ دوم 1392؛ عنوان رساله منطقی فلسفی؛ نویسنده لودویگ ویتگنشتاین؛ مترجم سروش دباغ؛ تهران، هرمس، 1393؛ در 305ص؛ چاپ دوم 1394؛ کتاب «رساله» تنها کتابی است که «ویتگنشتاین» در زمان حیات خویش منتشر کردند؛ در «رساله» نام هیچ منبعی به چشم نمی‌خورد، و کتاب تنها یک پانوشت دارد؛ گویی نویسنده ی «رساله»، که پیامبرگونه اسرار نهان را بر آفتاب افکنده، به این دقیقه باورمند بوده، که راه نوینی پیش پای کاروان فلسفه ی بشری باز کرده است؛ «رساله» آیینه ی تمام‌ نمایی است، از جد و جهد نابغه‌ ای، که هم متاثر از سنت تحلیلی، و فیلسوفان نسل اولی آن «گوتلوب فرگه»، «برتراند راسل» و «جیای مور» است، هم میراث‌دار سنت آلمانی استعلایی از مفاهیم کلیدی تفکّر کانت است، و هم دلی در گرو نویسندگان «داستان‌های انجیل»، و «برادران کارامازوف»، و حکمت، و معنویت مندرج در آثار ایشان دارد؛ شاید با نگریستن بر همگی این رساله هاست، که «ایان هکینگ»، فیلسوف تحلیلی مشهور معاصر، «رساله» را، اوج خلاقیت، و نبوغ بشر غربی می‌انگارد، و بر این باور است که تا تمدن غربی برپاست، این اثر استثنایی، خوانده و نقد و بررسی می‌شودتاریخ بهنگام رسانی 12091399هجری خورشیدی؛ ا شربیانی


  5. Adam Floridia Adam Floridia says:

    Hmmmhow to rate a book you didn't understand at all that is the uestion Maybe like this ?1 Here the Tractatus Logico Philosophicus is everything that is the case11 It is the case because it is the subject of this review 111 This review is determined by facts In this case all the facts that I came up with while reading the case112 The subject cannot include facts that are not the case because the totality of existent facts determines what is the case and whatever is not the case1121 What is not the case cannot be named because it did not occur and cannot be a state of affairs12 What is the case a fact is the existence of states of affairs2 An interpretation of facts is a thought21 Only logical thoughts can exist211 What is logical can be thought2112 What can be thought is logical22 What can be thought is the totality of states of affairs23 While reading the case many of the states of affairs were caused by interpretations thoughts that were not logical24 Because the thoughts were not logical the case cannot be said to exist3 Therefore this truth function proves that Tractatus Logico Philosophicus does not exist4 P'x p'X dN5 Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must pass over in silence


  6. Anthony Anthony says:

    Like many young American readers I made the mistake of reading the bulk of this text in an In N Out and now it is difficult for me to think about elementary propositions without thinking about someone ordering a cheeseburger and subseuently thinking about the relationship between the sign of cheeseburger and the atomic fact of the cheeseburger it refers to Wittgenstein orders his cheeseburger with the totality of everything that is the case And he eats the whole thing in under 100 pages


  7. Bradley Bradley says:

    Get your P's and 's ready folks because we're in for the ride of our lives Or notWittgenstein was living proof that androids were around and functioning during WWI That at least this single android had a sense of humor dry enough to turn the Mariana Trench into the Mojave Desert tooOr was this a joke at all? Let's seeMost of the numbered propositions were imminently clear and devoted to a single purpose describing realityLanguage is the big limiter which should never be a big surprise but he insists that all reality that is can be explained clearly Unfortunately Wittgenstein the big brilliant man that he is was fundamentally incapable of describing or CLEARLY STATING his philosophy Or using any object in his philosophy for the purposes of further elucidationThe resulting numbered tracts and use of Formal Logic were used to numb the biological minds reading it but there is good news It did help out with the translation problems for future AIs reviewing this work Difficult to read? You have no idea Really Or perhaps you do if you use chalkboards But THIS work of philosophy is the target for that old jokeWhat's the difference between a mathematician and a philosopher?Mathematicians know how to use an eraserThe logical problem of describing only physics in any positive way while never coming down hard on absolute statements like the way we only hypothesize that the sun will come up tomorrow eventually curled around itself in very strange ways like the problem of including your own description in with the description itselfIt keeps adding to the problem of description mathematically until the recursion explodes your head or makes you divide by zero Same difference reallyIt presages at least in part Goedel's Incompleteness Theorem Also PNP As in is it possible to include the index to your library in with the library itself or do you need to make a brand new card catalog system every time to include the original index? The time it takes to prove a thing is disproportionately large or impossible compared to the FACT OF THE SOLUTIONThis goes beyond logical fallacy It's a real thing we still deal with And yet Wittgenstein throws out the baby with the bathwater at the very end He makes a beautiful house of cards and claps his hands making us wake up after the long novel with a classic and it was only a dreamAm I kinda pissed? First by having been bored to tears and misunderstanding a handful of DENSE and OBLIUE propositions that refer to undefined and objectless other works unlike the careful analysis he made at the start? Yeah I am And like his reference to covering your right hand with your left while also covering your left with your right this text attempts to disprove everything firmly It makes me believe once again that formal logic while glorious in one way is an absolute horseradish in anotherI recommend this for anyone in love with highly complicated logical mazes and other computer science majors YOU MUST HAVE A SENSE OF HUMOR OR YOU WILL DIE Or kill someone One or the other


  8. Jafar Jafar says:

    I was just going to write “Of what we cannot speak we must remain silent” as my review The book ends with this rather affected proposition which actually would make a perfect book review for me as well However it’s an abomination to read or pretend to have done so a book of this stature supposedly the most important philosophical book of the 20th century no less and not write a paragraph or two about itWittgenstein wrote this book in the trenches and POW camps of World War I At the beginning of the book he says “Perhaps this book will be understood only by someone who has himself already had the thoughts that are expressed in it” That was bad news for me right from the beginning I don’t think I’ve ever had such lofty thoughts – not even closeI would have given this book one star and declared it a heap of pompous and pretentious intellectual chicanery but Wittgenstein is not to be slighted You see someone like Bertrand Russell whose genius I recognize was so impressed by this Wittgenstein dude that he gave up mathematical logic just because Wittgenstein told him so This was after Russell had spent years on writing Principia Mathematica and trying to defend logic and set theory against the sort of paradoxes of which Russell’s paradox is the most famous one Russell said that he couldn't uite understand what Wittgenstein was saying but he felt in his bones that he must be right That’s the kind of guy we’re talking about here I’m therefore left with no choice but humbly admit that this book was way over my head Respect Mr Wittgenstein The book has seven main propositions each expanded by other propositions except for the seventh proposition that ends the book I think I understood uite a few of them but I couldn’t tell you what the book as whole is trying to achieve or prove Some proposition sound just so arcane that I didn’t even bother to try to understand them Some propositions peaked my interest like Proposition 3333 I read it and then it ended with “That disposes of Russell’s paradox” I was like Say what? How did you dispose of Russell’s paradox in one paragraph? I stared at that proposition long and hard but I didn’t get it Some propositions looked just weird to me like Proposition 61203 where he proposes an “intuitive method” to recognize an expression as a tautology I leave it to another genius like Kurt Gödel to say that he wasn’t very impressed with Wittgenstein You see when Gödel published his Incompleteness Theorem some 10 years after Tractatus both Wittgenstein and Russell tripped over it Gödel was a Platonist who believed that mathematics describes an abstract reality not the empirical reality of logical positivists like Russell and Wittgenstein Gödel proved that there are true but unprovable propositions in mathematics That comes very close to saying that mathematical truths are independent of any human activity Wittgenstein didn’t accept Gödel’s results and the Dark Prince of Mathematics duly told him to “be fruitful and multiply but not in those words” Sorry I just had to mix Woody Allen into all this


  9. Xander Xander says:

    The Tractatus Logico Philosophicus 1921 by Ludwig Wittgenstein breathes a very intriguing air which draws you in and encapsulates you as you work your way through the collection of short statements towards the final conclusion Along this path one is utterly aware of the fact that one is treading continuously on very unfamiliar ground – ground that offers much resistance to the understanding Wittgenstein’s project is twofold first he wants to develop his logical theory and second he wants to explain how this conception of logic relates to the world of facts That is the work deals with two theories one logical the other epistemological And the conclusions Wittgenstein draws from them are extraordinary As he states in his opening sentence the world is the totality of facts – each fact is divided from each other fact Whether this division is finite and infinite isn’t clear to me I guess it doesn’t really matter for Wittgenstein’s theory anyway We perceive these facts in the sense that we picture them in our thoughts where the logical pictorial form of each picture corresponds to the fact it represents That is the logical structure of our thoughts corresponds with the logical structure of the facts in the world In short at its foundation the world consists of indivisible independent facts and each corresponds to a single indivisible independent logical element When we think our thoughts are translated so to speak in propositions Or rather our propositions are expressions of our thoughts which are themselves ultimately pictures of facts These propositions are either elemental ie they are the most simple undividable units of thoughts or they are composites of elemental propositions ie they are complexes Wittgenstein applies the then new method of symbolic logic to unearth the fundamental logical structure underneath and common to all these linguistic expressions of our thoughts He digs up the general form of a proposition – or rather truth function – which collects different elemental propositions containing variables into one complex and generates a truth value for the whole depending on the specific value of the variables But here there arises a fundamental issue Logical propositions are either true or false depending on the particular input the values of the variables The particular input of a variable isn’t really all that interesting to the logician – what he or she discovers is a general lawlike structure which is tautological in the sense that through the propositional relations the input rigidly determines the output These logical propositions are thus necessary while the particular input in the formulae since it consists of variables is accidental That is all particular facts the facts of the world are accidental This leads Wittgenstein to conclude that logic is the exploration of all that’s lawlike while everything outside logic – the world of facts – is accidental After developing his logical theory he applies his apparatus to physic and psychology ie scientific propositions “Physics is an attempt to construct according to a single plan all the true propositions that we need for a description of the world” pp 82 83 “The laws of physics with all their logical apparatus still speak however indirectly about the objects of the world” p 83This is a radical stance causality manifests itself in the world but isn’t part of physics All laws are logical necessities and are about the relations between facts not about the particular facts their descriptions themselves The key point is that we can experience and talk about the particular facts in the world but can never transcend them The world has no sense or rather it cannot be discovered within the world According to Wittgenstein all propositions and thus our thoughts about the world are of eual value That is of no value There is no value in the world – all uestions about religion ethics aesthetics etc are transcendental Since words apply only to the phenomenal world of experience we cannot talk about the subjects of religion ethics aesthetics etc That is we cannot ask any uestions about them in the first place Wittgenstein concludes in one of his final paragraphs “We feel that even when all possible scientific uestions have been answered the uestions of life remain completely untouched Of course there are then no uestions left and this itself is the answer” p 88 “The solution of the problems of life is seen in the vanishing of the problem” pp 88 89“There are indeed things that cannot be put into words They make themselves manifest They are what is called mystical” p 89 And he ends his work with the infamous words “What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence” p 89 It is very easy to read these final pages and accept his claims at face value But there is depth to these words than a superficial reader notices In fact Wittgenstein has ended up in a very eccentric position along the way he has built a self contained and tautological logical apparatus which is entirely separated from the world the totality of facts which we experience in life This apparatus is subseuently used to destroy all claims of logical necessity in physics and psychology and reduce these sciences to the status of collections of statements about particular facts in the world Finally the apparatus is used to show how only facts in the world can be put into words and everything else transcends this world and thus the possibility of speaking about them That is all things outside the world including the world itself lack sense are nonsense And since the logical apparatus itself is cut off from the world of facts the final act of Wittgenstein is to throw away his tool and end up with the only thing real the mystical He says “My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical when he has used them – as steps – to climb up beyond them He must so to speak throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it He must transcend these propositions and then he will see the world aright” p 89 As he himself points out in the preface after solving all the philosophical uestions – by pointing out they are literally nonsense – there is not much achieved He has cleared up all the human all too human pretence of thinking ourselves able to talk about the world in scientific and logical terms – all that rests is our living in the world It is not surprising that after writing his Tractatus Wittgenstein decided he had solved or dissolved? philosophy once and for all all that remained was living a life that was in accord with the mystical He was a man who was throughout his life obsessed with religion and ethics and so he decided to work as a gardener in a monastery he was rejected as a school teacher he was dismissed due to his loose hands as a proletarian in Soviet Russia he was rejected and offered a position as professor of philosopher in Kiev – which he rejected Basically all his attempts at living like a saint failed miserable and in 1929 he decided to return to Britain to return as a professor of philosophy in Cambridge There he radically altered his views on his former philosophy and developed a whole new philosophy which was as radical and influential as the first one Wittgenstein was a very remarkable man but also a very problematic character This shows in the Tractatus it is as unconventional extreme and original as no philosopher since Plato Perhaps it helped that he wasn’t trained as a philosopher but as an engineer in aeronautics – coming from a mathematical background and stepping into philosophy at a very late point in his education he was free from all the common prejudices and restrictions which education tends to foster For example some academic colleagues remarked that he never read Aristotle which perhaps is rather a compliment than a dismissal Being intellectually free he was able to invent two highly original philosophies which are spectacular and ground breaking than the works of most other twentieth century philosophersPlease feel free to add any additional info or correct any mistakes I've made in this review


  10. Robin Robin says:

    The ingenious work which had it been true would have provided a firm foundation for Positivism and provided justification for Philosophy's existence It also would have pretty much been the last word on the nature of and philosophical limits of language Instead Wittgenstein repudiated this view and put a nail in the coffin with PIElegant minimal logically crystalline And mostly wrong


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Logisch Philosophische Abhandlung ❰PDF / Epub❯ ★ Logisch Philosophische Abhandlung Author Ludwig Wittgenstein – Thomashillier.co.uk کتاب «رساله» تنها کتابی است که ویتگنشتاین در زمان حیاتش منتشر کرد؛ در «رساله» نام هیچ منبعی به چشم نمی‌خورد و کتاب «رساله» تنها کتابی است که ویتگنشتاین در زمان حیاتش منتشر کرد؛ در «رساله» نام هیچ منبعی به چشم نمی‌خورد و Logisch Philosophische PDF \ کتاب تنها یک پانوشت دارد گویی نویسنده «رساله»، که پیامبرگونه اسرار نهان را بر آفتاب افکنده، به این دقیقه متفطن بوده که راه نوینی پیش پای کاروان فلسفه بشری باز کرده است «رساله» آیینه تمام‌نمایی است از جد و جهد نابغه‌ای که هم متاثر از سنت تحلیلی و فیلسوفان نسل اولی آن فرگه، راسل و مور است، هم میراث‌دار سنت آلمانی استعلایی است و هم دلی در گرو نویسندگان «داستان‌های انجیل» و «برادران کارامازوف» و حکمت و معنویت مندرج در آثار ایشان دارد شاید با ملحوظ کردن جمیع این مؤلفه‌هاست که ایان هکینگ، فیلسوف تحلیلی مشهور معاصر، «رساله» را اوج خلاقیت و نبوغ بشر غربی می‌انگارد و بر این باور است که تا تمدن غربی برپاست این اثر استثنایی، خوانده و نقد و بررسی می‌شود.

  • Paperback
  • 304 pages
  • Logisch Philosophische Abhandlung
  • Ludwig Wittgenstein
  • Persian
  • 07 July 2015

About the Author: Ludwig Wittgenstein

Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein April – April was an Austrian British philosopher who worked primarily in logic Logisch Philosophische PDF \ the philosophy of mathematics the philosophy of mind and the philosophy of languageDescribed by Bertrand Russell as the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived passionate profound intense and dominating he helped inspire t.