[C] [Wittrs] Re: Analytic and Tautological
- From: "J D" <ubersicht@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:27:10 -0000
314. Imagine that the schoolboy really did ask "and is there a table there even
when I turn round, and even when no
one is there to see it?" Is the teacher to reassure him--and say "of course
there is!"?
Page 40
Perhaps the teacher will get a bit impatient, but think that the boy
will grow out of asking such questions.
Page 40
315. That is to say, the teacher will feel that this is not really a legitimate
question at all.
And it would be just the same if the pupil cast doubt on the
uniformity of nature, that is to say on the
justification of inductive arguments.--The teacher would feel that this was
only holding them up, that this way the
pupil would only get stuck and make no progress.--And he would be right. It
would be as if someone were looking
for some object in a room; he opens a drawer and doesn't see it there; then he
closes it again, waits, and opens it
once more to see if perhaps it isn't there now, and keeps on like that. He has
not learned to look for things. And in
the same way this pupil has not learned how to ask questions. He has not
learned the game that we are trying to
teach him.
Page 40
316. And isn't it the same as if the pupil were to hold up his history lesson
with doubts as to whether the earth
really....?
Page Break 41
Page 41
317. This doubt isn't one of the doubts in our game. (But not as if we chose
this game!)
Page 41
12.3.51
318. 'The question doesn't arise at all.' Its answer would characterize a
method. But there is no sharp boundary
between methodological propositions and propositions within a method.
Page 41
319. But wouldn't one have to say then, that there is no sharp boundary between
propositions of logic and empirical
propositions? The lack of sharpness is that of the boundary between rule and
empirical proposition.
Page 41
320. Here one must, I believe, remember that the concept 'proposition' itself
is not a sharp one.
Page 41
321. Isn't what I am saying: any empirical proposition can be transformed into
a postulate--and then becomes a
norm of description. But I am suspicious even of this. The sentence is too
general. One almost wants to say "any
empirical proposition can, theoretically, be transformed...", but what does
"theoretically" mean here? It sounds all
too reminiscent of the Tractatus.
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
