Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It “Uno de los trabajos filosóficos mas importantes del siglo XX , es brillante simple en su lenguaje pero complicado en su contenido, posiblemente se requieran muchas lecturas del mismo para poder capturar todo su significado.” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“This is a classic of the era of logical postivism. With the blessing of Bertrand Russell it became an influential text at least until its author threw it overboard for a new approach with his Philosophical Investigations.
jwhenderson wrote this review Monday, August 1, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
The early Wittgenstein was concerned with the relationship between propositions and the world, and hoped that by providing an account of this relationship all philosophical problems could be solved; these problems arise, he thought, because the logic of language is not evident in our ordinary use of language. The later Wittgenstein rejected many of the conclusions of the Tractatus, arguing that language is a kind of motley of language-games in which the meaning of words is derived from their public use.
The Tractatus is still worth reading as the most concise presentation of the logical analysis of propositions.”
0 of 1 members found this review helpful“Most definitive philosophical work ever written. It formed the basis of my Master's Thesis in Psychology.”
redawson wrote this review Sunday, April 3, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No“Uno de los trabajos filosóficos mas importantes del siglo XX , es brillante simple en su lenguaje pero complicado en su contenido, posiblemente se requieran muchas lecturas del mismo para poder capturar todo su significado. ”
Diego Castaneda wrote this review Wednesday, March 16, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“one of those masterworks of the 20th century, a work of meditation, one that cannot be understood in one reading, at least not by me...”
Ken V wrote this review Tuesday, January 4, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“In a way this pushes you to the limit of language. It is very good. Yet how do we live.”
Edge Z wrote this review Monday, October 18, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“The Tractatus can only be properly understood when set against the philosophy of Frege and Russell. Gottlob Frege (1848–1925) is generally credited as the founder of analytic philosophy. Spurred by the rigorization of mathematics in the 19th century, Frege set out to show that the truths of mathematics could all be derived from logic, and would not have to rely on "pure intuition," as Kant had argued. To show this, Frege had to invent modern logic. Whereas the logic of Aristotle, which had changed little in the previous 2400 years, was based on the subject-predicate form of grammar, Frege's logic analyzed sentences between concepts and objects, allowing for a great deal more flexibility. In particular, it allowed Frege to introduce the concept of generality into logic. While traditional logic would analyze a sentence such as "all horses are mammals" by dividing it into the subject, "all horses," and the predicate, "are mammals," Frege analyzed it into the object "horse" and the concept "mammal." Frege's analysis would read: "For all x, if x is a horse, then x is a mammal."
Rowland Bismark Fernando wrote this review Monday, June 14, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
According to Frege, concepts are functions in the mathematical sense, but applied more broadly. That is, the concept "mammal" can be expressed as the function "x is a mammal" where any object can be inserted for x. Any function can then mean one of two things: either "the true" (e.g. if x is "my mother") or "the false" (e.g. if x is "the Eiffel Tower"). This would lead Frege into difficulty, as phrases like "the concept of a horse" could be substituted for x, and could thus be considered objects.
One of Frege's significant contributions was to flush psychology out of logic and the analysis of sentences. Kant, for instance, distinguished analytic and synthetic judgments according to how these judgments were framed in the mind. Frege insisted the analytic/synthetic distinction had nothing to do with psychology, but rather with justification: a judgment that can be justified by means of logic alone is analytic, whereas a judgment that must be justified by referring to the world is synthetic. Effectively, Frege argued that the meaning of sentences has nothing to do with what goes on in the head, and everything to do with their logical structure.
Wittgenstein's other major influence was Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), with whom he studied at Cambridge. Russell himself was an admirer of Frege's, and built on Frege's work to a large extent. His major work, thePrincipia Mathematica, co-authored by Alfred North Whitehead, was a Frege-inspired effort to derive all of mathematics from logical axioms.
Russell's first encounter with Frege was in 1902 when he discovered a fundamental paradox (called "Russell's Paradox") in Frege's logic, which led to his development of the "Theory of Types." Unlike either Frege or Wittgenstein, Russell turned increasingly toward an empirical philosophy. He argued that the language we normally use consists solely of descriptions: if I talk about "the queen of England," I am offering a description of a woman I have never met. A full analysis of language will rid propositions of descriptions, by replacing them with objects we are acquainted with. The only things we are directly acquainted with, according to Russell, are sense data. Thus, all language can ultimately be analyzed down to remarks on present or past sense data with which we are directly acquainted.
Frege and Russell shared a "universalist" conception of logic. They saw logic as the most fundamental set of laws, which are universally applicable. While the laws of physics deal only with physical phenomena, and the laws of grammar deal only with language, the laws of logic deal with everything. They saw logic as providing a framework for rationality. This logic could be formalized into a small number of simple, self-evident axioms, and equally self-evident laws of inference. The propositions of logic could then be deduced from these axioms by means of the laws of inference, and these propositions would stand as the laws to which all rational thought must adhere.
Another significant influence on Wittgenstein's thought, from an entirely different quarter, was the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860). Schopenhauer's major work, The World as Will and as Ideadistinguished between two stances we can take toward experience. On one hand, there is the "world as idea," which is the world as it appears to our senses, and as we experience it. On the other hand, there is the "world as will," which constitutes an awareness of our own agency, as beings who can define our world according to our will. According to Schopenhauer, it is only through this awareness of our own agency that we can tap into the true nature of reality. While Schopenhauer's influence is most present near the end of the Tractatus, the book as a whole bears a mystical outlook that distinguishes Wittgenstein from either Frege or Russell.
The Tractatus was a controversial work upon publication, and its influence was widespread. It resolved the many tensions that lingered in Frege's and Russell's work, marking an end to the early period of analytic philosophy. The most distinguished followers of the Tractatus were the logical positivists of the Vienna Circle, who flourished in the late 1920s and early 1930s. However, their reading of the Tractatus was mistaken on a number of points, and borrowed heavily from Russell's empiricism.
Wittgenstein's influence has not been confined to philosophy. He is one of the few philosophers of the 20th century to capture the imagination of the general public. He has been read and puzzled over widely, and his work has inspired artists and thinkers in a variety of fields.”“One of the greatest...of all philosophical works...ever brought onto the light of the human mind...I've yet to meet someone who can even begin to comprehend it, or forge any meaningful relation with regard to it. Definitely struck me to the core, and remains one of my best friends...at first I had doubts as to it's "human" origins.”
Nobody T wrote this review Sunday, April 11, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“Only worth reading for some really bangin' quotes--notably, propositions 1 and 7.”
Meanderthal wrote this review Monday, February 1, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“This book is impossible to rate unless you've been dead for a hundred years, or have never had any contact with computers or post-pubescent chatter. It must be the most impressive piece of work to emerge from a trench with overflying luftwaffe, but I do sense that it overextends wildly. You probably wouldn't get as much as semester credit for so much unreferenced rudeness directed at your teachers. Even if you called them friends.”
freeboot wrote this review Sunday, June 7, 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
0 of 2 members found this review helpful“Just glad he didn't live long enough to write another. Yet another steaming pile of philosophical tail chasing, I have brought upon myself. I would like to thank Bertrand Russell for his patronising introduction he seems to be all over this Routledge catalogue like a rash. Maybe I am being a little harsh on the man (Wittgenstein) there are some gems in this shit cluster, for example, 6.5 When the answer cannot be put into words, neither can the question be put into words. The riddle does not exist. If a question can be framed at all, it is also possible to answer it.
David. wrote this review Saturday, May 23, 2009. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
There are plenty of this sort, quotes that would come in handy when your pissed out of your head with friends and strangers in some open plan living area, drinking some "taste the difference" Ciante who have got to the stage of the party where most people have left and the remaining people, usually couples through a combination of intoxication and self importance have engaged in one of those spiritual/internet assembled opinion of ones reality conversations. And if you had taken the time to glean some of these quotes from this book, you would have done well in such a situation. Any other situation though, people will think your a self indulgent loner. I recommend people read it but with a pinch of salt.”
