Did this motherfucker solve philosophy or not? Who disagrees with him?

File: 134 KB, 632x475, witt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Apr 3 22:46:49 2015 No.6354885 [Reply] [Original]

Did this motherfucker solve philosophy or not? Who disagrees with him?

Anonymous Fri Apr 3 23:38:56 2015 No.6355005

Are you talking about Young (Tractatus) or Old (Investigations)?

In the former case, EVERYONE, including himself. For example, Kurt Gödel proved in the 1930s mathematically that it's impossible to logically explain a system from the point of view of the system itself completely, arguably discarding Wittgenstein's method. Wittgenstein himself simply realized that human language encompassed and consisted of far more than true/false sentences.

In the latter, most philosophers. It's a chaotic work with next to no final conclusions. From my knowledge though, his argument against metaphysics (the private language argument) and to an even larger degree his criticism of the possibility of making final definitions are very popular among contemporary philosophers. Arguably it was also the first postmodern philosophy in that truth seems to depend on the language you're operating within.

Hope this made sense/helped!

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 3 23:46:35 2015 No.6355025 >>6355005 >his argument against metaphysics (the private language argument) Could you explain how the two relate?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 3 23:47:44 2015 No.6355032 >>6355005 >Kurt Gödel proved in the 1930s mathematically that it's impossible to logically explain a system from the point of view of the system itself completely, arguably discarding Wittgenstein's method That is literally impossible

Anonymous Fri Apr 3 23:57:14 2015 No.6355072

>>6355025

According to Wittgenstein, from what I gather, language presupposes a social community. So when you go, "I think, therefore I am," all you've really proved is that your social community thinks you do. Or perhaps more faithfully to Wittgenstein, you are misusing common language to develop, through wordplay, a completely fictitious philosophy.

>>6355032

He was just crazy awesome. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 3 23:58:53 2015 No.6355077 >>6355072 >He was just crazy awesome. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/ absolute trash >hey guys look at me im playing mathematician i solved philosophy!

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:03:16 2015 No.6355095 >>6355077 If you can dent that shit, you're going to be the next great analytic philosopher.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:20:24 2015 No.6355161 File: 1.23 MB, 912x905, super golden lel 3.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >this thread

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:31:59 2015 No.6355209 When I see philosophers like Wittgenstein or McDowell described as having a 'therapeutic' vision for philosophy I imagine them giving people massages.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:34:46 2015 No.6355222 >>6354885 Wittgenstein does. Also he was gay and autistic

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:37:26 2015 No.6355237 In any case, disputation can clearly be shown to continue long after a matter ought to have been settled, no? And people have been unanimously incorrect time and time again. Back to the books, OP, there's no shortcuts to truth.

>>	Pope Pius XII !4JuH9bnRMw Sat Apr 4 00:40:46 2015 No.6355243 File: 115 KB, 358x495, @ (1).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] We are living in the post-philosophy age

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:41:18 2015 No.6355245 >>6355072 The incompleteness theorems only apply to arithmetic founded in set theory founded in logic you retard. Don't overreach

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:43:22 2015 No.6355255

>>6355245

Are you some kind of idiot?
Incompleteness is the mathematical equivalent of quantum mechanics. It means whatever the hell would be useful for your thesis, and you're under no obligation to explain that relationship in precise terms.

Personally, I think Incompleteness suggests that human knowledge is trivial, and that we should all become as ignorant as possible to decrease that triviality and become more important.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:51:17 2015 No.6355285 >>6355245 Are you certain? I'm not saying it definitely eliminates the Tractatus, but can it not be reasonably argued that it challenges his theory, being founded in logic after all?

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 00:56:46 2015 No.6355312

>>6355285

Not the dude you're talking to but:

while it's possible and one can grasp the intuition behind such an idea, one would have their work cut out for them if they wanted to show it at a level of rigor either Godel or Wittgenstein would have accepted-- this is a massive undertaking.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 01:01:56 2015 No.6355327 >>6355243 ya man totally

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 01:08:51 2015 No.6355352 >>6354885 How the fuck could you possibly SOLVE the pursuit of wisdom?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 01:20:22 2015 No.6355375 File: 217 KB, 491x700, 42508893eef00ede599e55f9499f2187.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Did this motherfucker solve philosophy or not? Yes. This book is the end of philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:13:32 2015 No.6355553 >>6355285 No, Gödel's incompleteness theorems have no consequence for Wittgenstein's logical metaphysics

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:15:26 2015 No.6355557 [DELETED]

Mozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-Minor

NERDS THINK THEY CAN SOLVE PHILOSOPHY WITH MATH

Mozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-Minor

GO BACK TO MATH CLASS U FUCKKIN NERDS

Mozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-Minor

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:17:10 2015 No.6355564 >>6355072 Kind of like how people misuse common language when they argue for the existence of free will?

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:17:14 2015 No.6355565

>>6355255
>Incompleteness is the mathematical equivalent of quantum mechanics.

What? Incompleteness has nothing to do with probabilities. All it means is that math is fundamentally a subjective phenomenon, it can't be reduced to pure objectivity (e.g., the Hilbert program)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:19:39 2015 No.6355573 >>6355557 anon your pills

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:20:22 2015 No.6355575 >>6355557 >NERDS THINK THEY CAN SOLVE PHILOSOPHY WITH MATH Both Mathematics and Epistemological / Ontological Philosophy are languages.

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 02:24:31 2015 No.6355591 [DELETED]

>>6355573
>>6355575
Mozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-Minor

IM LAUGHING SO HARD RIGHT NOW

Mozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-MinorMozart's Fantasy No. 4 in C-Minor

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 05:37:41 2015 No.6355907

Inspired by recurring retarded threads like this I propose a new invokable principle which I hereby dub Anon's law: As a discussion concerning Wittgenstein and rest of the Vienna Circle super stars, formal systems, mathematics, logic and related philosophical issues grows longer, the probability of someone misinterpreting Gödel's theorems approaches one.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 05:53:47 2015 No.6355933 >>6355553 How is there room in his theory for mathematical truths that aren't tautologies?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 05:55:09 2015 No.6355938 >>6355565 >All it means is that math is fundamentally a subjective phenomenon, it can't be reduced to pure objectivity (e.g., the Hilbert program) No.

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 06:01:48 2015 No.6355953

>>6355255
>Incompleteness is the mathematical equivalent of quantum mechanics. It means whatever the hell would be useful for your thesis
No. Incompleteness means that there are some problems that math cannot resolve. A limit on the boundary conditions of math's applicability, derived by mathematical methods itself.

>>6355565
>All it means is that math is fundamentally a subjective phenomenon
Of course not.

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 06:31:55 2015 No.6356010

>>6355933
>>6355255

No mathematician thinks in this way. Modern math start with axioms in propositional calculus, which is roughly syllogistic + predicate logic. Almost all math you've seen will be constructed from ZFC which has traditionally been controversial, and there certainly are anti-foundation axioms contesting those. With ZFC you are able to generate axioms of a probability space, for example, from which to compute probability and etc.

The Incompleteness theorems apply to arithmetic formal systems, and the construction of Godel Numbers is already specified to mapping metamathematical statements to numbers. Yes foundational logic is involved to justify math, but Godel is speaking in a tighter scope of logic than Wittgenstein.

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 07:14:10 2015 No.6356080

>>6355095
>>6355072
why is >>6355077 deleted and what did he say? did it have something to do with goedels?
i fucking love goedels.
goedel escher bach ist nice or a film called The Net which also refers to it.
Godel proves not only the insolvability of given sentences. e.g. i am a liar, but also proves that you can create meaning by analogy between different formal systems which hofstadter says is ultimately consciousness and when you read zizek and hegel closely you could find an analogy there to the selfreflexivity of the void and the "setzen der voraussetzungen"

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 17:17:42 2015 No.6357945 >>6355243 I thought this for a while but now I think that in a few decades, someone will show up and turn shit on its head like many people have before.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 17:45:22 2015 No.6358059 whats the main difference between old Witty and young wittgey? Doesn't he pretty much just say tautologies are a big no no?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 17:47:54 2015 No.6358070 neither. he was not trying to engage in the debate, he was just trying to clarify its significance.

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 18:05:16 2015 No.6358123

>>6358059
Young Witty: massive fact/value distinction - only facts can be said, values can't be said at all. "Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent."

Old Witty: No fact/value distinction. In fact, no inherent distinctions AT ALL. There can be no such thing as a philosophical theory. Philosophy ought to be more like anthropology with a therapeutic purpose. "We must do away with all explanation, and description alone must take its place".

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 18:17:58 2015 No.6358178 >>6358123 What sets Late Wittgenstein apart from the Post Modernists?

Anonymous Sat Apr 4 18:52:51 2015 No.6358345

>>6358178
You'll have to narrow that question down for a proper answer. Although generally he shares with Derrida an anti-essentialism and anti-foundationalism. I think he'd dislike Foucault's suspicion and resentment of everything; Witty was suspicious of suspicion.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 22:27:17 2015 No.6358944 >>6355375 are you certain of this?

>>	Pope Pius XII !4JuH9bnRMw Sat Apr 4 22:35:04 2015 No.6358971 He said philosophy asked the wrong questions because it was getting mixed up in language games

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 22:44:07 2015 No.6359004 >>6355072 >getting euphoric over using Goedel in a framework it doesn't belong to Please take your pills already

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 4 23:11:53 2015 No.6359102 >>6355255 Another faggot on /lit/ pretending to understand quantum mechanics. I bet you think if you put a cat in a box it'll be dead and alive at the same time.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 5 00:50:56 2015 No.6359409 >>6359102 >taking obvious b8 I thought people could read on the literature board

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 5 00:53:35 2015 No.6359416 He's an analytic. He has some good ideas on meaning and all that but ultimately there's no "scientific" way to study politics or ethics, so he still hasn't ended philosophy for all subjects.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 5 01:02:19 2015 No.6359452 >>6359416 >ultimately there's no "scientific" way to study politics or ethics, so he still hasn't ended philosophy for all subjects. "Ethics and aesthetics are one."

>>	The Ecstasy of St Augustine !2K2owVXPf6 Sun Apr 5 01:14:25 2015 No.6359491 File: 482 KB, 791x1026, c136.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6359102 I think most posters here don't believe in metaphysics

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature