In 'theory of types' Russell had to consider the meaning of signs when establishing the rules for them. This is an error. We can dispose of Russell's paradox as follows: No proposition can make a statement about itself, because a propositional sign cannot contain itself. (That is the whole of the 'theory of types').
The reason why a function cannot be its own argument is that the function sign already contains the prototype of its argument, and it cannot contain itself.
Let us suppose that the function F(fx) could be its own argument. In that case, we would have propositions such as: 'F(F(fx))' where the outer function F and the inner function F must have different meanings. This is because the inner one has the form ϕ(f(x)) and the outer one has the form ψ(ϕ(fx)).
Only the letter 'F' is common to the two functions, but the letter by itself signifies nothing. This immediately becomes clear if instead of 'F(Fu)' we write '(∃φ) : F(φu) . φu = Fu'.
The rules of logical syntax must be self evident, once one knows how each individual sign signifies.
This log was inspired by "How to Read Wittgenstein" and "Ludwig Wittgenstein: the duty of genius" by Ray Monk. It is based on reading Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus by Ludwig Wittgenstein translated by D. F. Pears & B. F. McGuinness (Routledge and Kegan Paul:1963)
Monday, March 31, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Labels
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 1
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2.01
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2.02
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2.03 to 2.063
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2.1
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 2.2
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.0
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.1
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.2
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.3
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.32
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.33
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.34
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 3.4 to 3.5
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.00
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.01 to 4.022
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.023 to 4.027
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.03
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.04
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.05 to 4.0621
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.1
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.12 to 4.1213
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.122 to 4.1252
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.126 to 4.128
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.2 to 4.28
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.3 to 4.442
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.45 TO 4.4661
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.5 to 4.53
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5 to 5.101
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.05 to 5.156
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.11 to 5.132
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.133 to 5.143
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.2 to 5.254
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.3
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.4 to 5.44
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.45
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.46 to 5.472
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.473 to5.476
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.5 to 5.503
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.51
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.52
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.53 to 5.535
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.5351 to 5.5352
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.55 to 5.5571
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.6 to 5.621
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 5.63 to 5.641
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6 to 6.01
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.1 to 6.1202
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.1203
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.121 to 6.124
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.125 to 6.1271
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.13 to 6.2331
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.234 to 6.3432
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.342 to 6.372
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.373 to 6.3751
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.5
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 7
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(69)
-
▼
March
(29)
- A proposition describes of a matter of fact.
- A sentence is an image of reality: it shows its se...
- A thought is a sentence that made sense.
- A propositional sign, applied by thinking it, is a...
- Any valid symbolic language must be translatable.
- Russell's Paradox
- The sign is that aspect of a symbol perceivable by...
- Only a sentence makes sense; only in the context o...
- What signs do not say, their application shows.
- Thought expresses itself perceptibly in a sentence.
- We cannot think anything illogical.
- An image depicts its sense.
- We imagine the facts.
- In a matter of fact, objects intertwine like links...
- An object is simple.
- A matter of fact is a compound of objects.
- There is no enigma.
- Wittgenstein's Preface
- Second Reading
- Whereof one cannot find the words to speak, thereo...
- All propositions result from successive applicatio...
- A proposition is a truth function of elemental pro...
- A thought is a sentence that makes sense.
- The logical image of facts is thought.
- What is so, a fact, is that there are matters of f...
- The world is all that is so.
- Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Title Page
- Comments on Method
- Foreword
-
▼
March
(29)
No comments:
Post a Comment