[lit-ideas] Necessity in the Tractatus
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 09:41:43 EDT
In my two previous rambles, I focused on "and" which is just as well.
A good case to consider is
p v ~p
or
p & ~p
These are usually regarded, respectively as tautology and contradiction.
Are they _necessarily_ so. Recall Sportin' Life, "It ain't necessarily so".
Wittgenstein was pretty narrow-minded when it comes to things, so he
possibly thought it _is_ necessarily so.
Strawson prefers to speak of 'logically true' rather than 'necessarily
true'. We need a Kripke to systematise the uses of 'necessarily' into
'logical', 'epistemic' and 'metaphysical' or ontological.
Cheers,
JLS
**************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Necessity in the Tractatus - Jlsperanza
