Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
Hintikka I 228
Sense Data/Ostension/Definition/Learning/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: pointing out, the legacy of the Tractatus "Showing", can certainly serve as the only method for defining sense data.
But as soon as inaccessible objects (atoms) are added, it is no longer sufficient.
Showing/WittgensteinVsShowing/Ostension/Hintikka: Problem: e.g. how to show the state of California? (>Definition, >indicative definition.)
Even if Wittgenstein claims on the first page of the Blue Book that all non-verbal definitions are indicative definitions, he immediately limits this:
I 229
"Does the indicative definition itself need to be understood?" >Understanding.
The listener must probably already know the logical status of the defined entity.
For example, it is not possible to point out a non-existent object, even if you are telephoning someone who sees it. The same applies to other people's immediate experiences.
And if one thinks that even the words "there" and "this" for their part are to be introduced by an indicative explanation, then this indicative indication must be quite different from the usual indicative explanation. (PI §§ 9,38). >Explanation.
I 329
Color/Definition/Reference/Wittgenstein:...Now we can understand what Wittgenstein means when he says: ""red" means the color that comes to my mind when I hear the word "red"" would be a definition.
No explanation of the nature of the denotation by a word.
This point loses its essence if "denotation" is understood here in the sense of "name". Even a completely successful definition does not indicate what it means that the definition refers directly - i.e. without language play - to its subject.
- - -
II 44/45
Ostensive Definition/Wittgenstein: it just adds something to the symbolism - it does not lead beyond the symbolism - a set of symbols is replaced by another. The explanation of the meaning of symbols is given in turn, via symbols. >Symbols.
II 73
Definition/Wittgenstein: a definition is nothing more than an indication of a relevant rule - (s) context: e.g. negation.) >Negation.
II 116
Calculating/Wittgenstein: the tables of multiplication are definitions.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.