Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
pbellon.github.io
Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
1–10 of 30 posts
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#2Looking at Tractatus logico-philosophicus, I'm reminded of Ayn Rand's Objectivism - another attempt to derive a philosophy from axiomatic principles.
However, it's probably impossible to deductively derive something that lines up with reality, given how language itself is an imperfect medium for that.
It looks like Wittgenstein eventually points out the problems with the Tractatus in his later works like "The Philosophical Investigations"
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#3Looking at Tractatus logico-philosophicus, I'm reminded of Ayn Rand's Objectivism - another attempt to derive a philosophy from axiomatic principles. However, it's probably impossible to deductively derive something that lines up with reality, given how language itself is an imperfect medium for that. It looks like Wittgenstein eventually points out the problems with the Tractatus in his later works like "The Philoso…
> It looks like Wittgenstein eventually points out the problems with the Tractatus in his later works like "The Philosophical Investigations"
Yes, he came to the same conclusion you did, that what he attemtped in the Tractatus was misguided at best and impossible at worst.
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#4Is this just some hyped up collection of interconnected assertions (for lack of a better description) or does it actually reveal something non-trivial if you take the effort to dive into it?
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#5A perhaps useful quick reference point-by-point summary of the Tractatus but it would be even better if one could see the whole tree and branches in full or expandable/collapsible branch by branch. As is, it requires the text to be open in front of one (this may not always be convenient in the internet age).
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#6Don't know much about Tractatus.
Don't know much about d3js.
But I do know this let me see.
what a wonderful world they can be.
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#7Is this just some hyped up collection of interconnected assertions (for lack of a better description) or does it actually reveal something non-trivial if you take the effort to dive into it?
My theory is that the tractacus was a bullshit detector made by Wittgenstein.
If after reading it you think it is genius you fail the test, if you understand that it is a bunch of refined nonsense you pass.
Honestly it is obvious to anybody that actually spent time reading it, e.g even the truth tables in it are invalid. He conclude the book by saying that when you don't know what you're talking about, it would be better for you to not speak about it, this is obviously a meta-critic about the tractacus.
Ironically, most philosophers fail the test (obviously most of most philosophers admire it out of authority, without having read a single page from it nor it's subsequent book (as if the subsequent book was even needed for understanding it's true semantically-empty nature..))
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#8Is this just some hyped up collection of interconnected assertions (for lack of a better description) or does it actually reveal something non-trivial if you take the effort to dive into it?
My theory is that the tractacus was a bullshit detector made by Wittgenstein. If after reading it you think it is genius you fail the test, if you understand that it is a bunch of refined nonsense you pass. Honestly it is obvious to anybody that actually spent time reading it, e.g even the truth tables in it are invalid. He conclude the book by saying that when you don't know what you're talking about, it would be be…
> e.g even the truth tables in it are invalid
that would be a very specific and relevant point to make. can you back this up with sources or more than one example?
> My theory is that the tractacus was a bullshit detector
Are you serious? This seems like a fun idea but doesn't really pass my own bullshit detector.
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
My theory is that the tractacus was a bullshit detector made by Wittgenstein. If after reading it you think it is genius you fail the test, if you understand that it is a bunch of refined nonsense you pass. Honestly it is obvious to anybody that actually spent time reading it, e.g even the truth tables in it are invalid. He conclude the book by saying that when you don't know what you're talking about, it would be be…
> e.g even the truth tables in it are invalid that would be a very specific and relevant point to make. can you back this up with sources or more than one example? > My theory is that the tractacus was a bullshit detector Are you serious? This seems like a fun idea but doesn't really pass my own bullshit detector.
can you back this up with sources or more than one example?
I am referring to the case
x=3 y=3 of the assertion 4.442
Re: Visualization of Wittgenstein's Tractatus logico-philosophicus
#10Looking at Tractatus logico-philosophicus, I'm reminded of Ayn Rand's Objectivism - another attempt to derive a philosophy from axiomatic principles. However, it's probably impossible to deductively derive something that lines up with reality, given how language itself is an imperfect medium for that. It looks like Wittgenstein eventually points out the problems with the Tractatus in his later works like "The Philoso…
> It looks like Wittgenstein eventually points out the problems with the Tractatus in his later works like "The Philosophical Investigations" Yes, he came to the same conclusion you did, that what he attemtped in the Tractatus was misguided at best and impossible at worst.
IIRC doesn’t the Tractatus itself famously end with a kind of acknowledgment of its own failure? “Whereof one can’t speak, thereof one must be silent?”