|Limits, philosophy: here we are concerned with the classification of knowledge domains or the identification of possibilities for thought. We need to determine what belongs to a domain and what does not. Problems arise wherever something is to be described beyond an area by the means of this area itself ('impracticability', 'unthinkability','inconceivability'), as well as where an area is solely covered by means originating from this area itself ( Circularity)._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.|
Books on Amazon
|Hintikka I 19
Limit/language/Wittgenstein is shown by the impossibility to describe a fact, without repeating the corresponding sentence - Hintikka: = thesis of linguistic relativity.
The relationship between name and object cannot be expressed in language - not even the concept of existence - only presentable by the use of the name.
Limit/language/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: important: inner limit: the ability of what can be expressed in language about the language. - E.g. When I say that language can be extended, I must say what I mean.
Limit/world/object/Tractatus/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: the world as the whole of objects and the with that given limit would be inconceivable, if not also relations would belong to the objects.
Limit/language/Wittgenstein: E.g. expectation, fulfillment must have a shared expression - e.g. "red" must occur in the appropriate sentences. Limit/expression: this shared can in turn not be described by a sentence.
A symbolism cannot explain itself. - Only by another symbolism - a single symbol can be explained, but only by another symbol. - (> Regress).
Logic/limit/Wittgenstein/Schulte: the logic will not be given a limit through the use of the language, of course. - It is, so to speak, the common framework of my and your language.
Tetens VII 78
Limit/image theory/picture theory/Tractatus/Tetens: Problem: a picture cannot display its form of image. (2,172) - Problem: for this it would have to be outside its form of presentation. (2174)) - this also applies to sentences - sentence: cannot represent what he has in common with reality - or he would have to set up himself outside the logic.
Language/Limit/Tractatus/Tetens: with sentences about the language, we end up with "meta-levelled" tautologies - E.g. instances of the Talski-schema. - (E.g. ((s) meaning postulates that are uninformative).
Logic/existence/Tractatus/Tetens: but the logic cannot tell what the case is, otherwise it would exclude options. - ((s) so the logic would have to exclude logical possibilities). (See 5.61).
Subject/limit/world/Tractatus/Wittgenstein/Tetens: Although self-reflection is possible, I always add something what I cannot catch up with: the way in which I think at the moment about the world. - Therefore, I exist as a subject in the world not like the objects - with a thought about the world I still win a property additionally.
Accuracy of solipsism: does not show itself in the content, but in the completion of the higher-level thought.
Subject: shrinks to what the thought has - but not as part of the content of thought._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
Vorlesungen 1930-35 Frankfurt 1989
Das Blaue Buch - Eine Philosophische Betrachtung Frankfurt 1984
Tractatus Logico Philosophicus Frankfurt/M 1960
Jaakko and Merrill B. Hintikka
The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic Dordrecht 1989
J. Hintikka/M. B. Hintikka
Untersuchungen zu Wittgenstein Frankfurt 1996
Geist, Gehirn, Maschine Stuttgart 1994
Tractatus - Ein Kommentar Stuttgart 2009