[Wittrs] [quickphilosophy] Re: 1.12; 1.13; 1.2 & 1.21

  • From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 11:20:58 -0000

--- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@...> wrote:
>  I am reading TLP with no expectation  that
> it could work, but still interested in what W was trying to do.  Perhaps
> I'll be surprised, though since W later rejected it himself,  that seems
> unlikely.

FWIW, here's how I look at the process of reading "great books."  TLP was a 
very influential work and W was obviously a very smart guy.  So when I consider 
the various theses put forth in the Tractatus I want to try to understand (i) 
what they mean; (ii) why he believed them; and (iii) whether there were/are 
good reasons for believing/rejecting them--separate from the position W took.  
IMO, the fact that W later rejected this or that thesis (even with supreme 
disgust) is no more dispositive with respect to its reasonability than the fact 
that he earlier believed it (with absolute confidence). Those attitudes are 
just additional factors to consider.

Anyhow, that's my approach to studying works of philosophy, generally, and I'm 
enjoying plowing through TLP, especially given the fact that there's so much 
secondary literature to consult when something is confusing to me.


Other related posts: