... Recently, one issue that has been raised on the list is to what extent the Tractatus supports the requirement of empirical verification for propositions that are not analytic (tautological). What are the arguments against the idea? The argument for it are as follows: 2.12 A picture is a model of reality 2.131 In a picture the elements of the picture are the representatives of objects 2.14 What constitutes a picture is that its elements are related to one another in a determinate way 2.15 The fact that the elements of a picture are related to one another in a determinate way represents that things are related to one another in the same way 2. A picture is a fact (2.141) 3. A logical picture of the facts is a thought (3) 4. In the proposition the thought is expressed perceptibly through the senses (3.1) 4.01 A proposition is a picture of reality 4.023 A proposition must restrict reality to two alternatives: yes or no. 6-something. the correct method of philosophy is to say nothing at all but the propositions of natural science ... (yada yada) Add to this the invention of truth-tables. Given all of this, it would be correct, would it not, to say of any utterance that is not an analytic proposition, that it must be empirically verifiable for it to be a "proposition?" So if I say "God is in heaven," this cannot ever be a proposition even though it seems to have the format of one (that X resides in the place you can't see). It must reduce to a verifiable statement of natural science -- is that a correct reading? Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq. Assistant Professor Wright State University Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860 Discussion Group: http://seanwilson.org/wittgenstein.discussion.html ========================================= Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/