Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Wittgenstein in the Tractatus holds that logical form cannot be said but only shown, placing it beyond any empirical proposition's descriptive reach.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
The saying/showing distinction itself appears to be a substantive philosophical claim that violates its own conditions of significance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Wittgenstein's own logical analysis in the Tractatus seems to *say* things about logical form, contradicting the claim it cannot be said.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If logical form can be 'shown' through examples or demonstrations, it's unclear why this differs meaningfully from a form of saying or expressing.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Logical form structures all meaningful propositions but cannot itself be a proposition without circularity or infinite regress.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
The distinction between saying and showing preserves logic's foundational role while avoiding the self-refutation of stating metalogical truths.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Empirical propositions picture atomic facts, but logical form transcends particular content and thus cannot be pictured empirically.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.