|
Example [“I have a peculiar feeling of pastness in my wrist”] 19.
6) “We shall never know whether he meant this or
that”.
[B|C] died after the training in that room.
We say: “Perhaps he would have
reakted like B when taken into the
daylight.
But we shall never know.
α) We should say this question was decided if he arose from his grave & we then made the experiment with him. Or his ghost appeared to us in a spiritualist séanse & told us that he has a certain experience. β) We dont accept any evidence. But what if we didn't accept the evidence in 5 either & said somet (something like) “We can't be sure that [it|he] is the identical man who was trained in the room”, or: “he is the identical man but we can't know whether he would have behaved like this in the past time when he was trained. 7) We introduce a ˇnew notation for the expression: “If [A|P] happens then always (as a rule) [B|Q] happens. P didnt happen this time & so Q didn't happen” We say instead: “If P had happened Q would◇ have happened”. E.g. “If the gunpowder is dry ˇunder these circumstances a spark of this strength explodes it. It wouldn't dry this time & under the same circumstances didn't explode” We say instead “If the gunpowder had been dry this time it would have exploded”. The point of this notation is that it nears the form of this preposition very much to the form: “The gunpowder 20. was dry this time so it
exploded”
I mean the new form doesn't stress the fact that
it did not explode but, we might say, paints a vivid picture of it exploding
this time.
We could imagine a ˇtwo forms of expression in a
picture language which was corresponding to the two kinds of
notations in the word language.
The second notation would consist in actually painting a picture of the
explosion.
The second notation will be particularly appropriate
ˇe.g. if we wish to give a person a shock by
making him vividly imagine
8) Someone might say to us: “But are you sure that the second sentence means just what the first one means & not ◇◇◇ just something similar or ˇthat & something else as well? (Moore) I should say: I'm talking of the case where it means just this, if it's used in & this seems to me an important case (which you causede by saying what you have said). But of course I don't say that it isn't used in other ways as well & then we'll have to talk about these other cases separately. 9) Someone says –“lowering ones voice some 21
times means
¤
¤ that you
whish to draw special attention to what you now say
¤• in other cases you
lower your voice to show
¤• that what you say is less
important than the rest.
10) We say “We doncan't know whether this spark would have been sufficient to ignite that mixture; because we can't reproduce the exact mixture not having the exact ingredients or not having a balance to weigh them etc etc. But suppose we could reproduce all the circumstances & someone said “we can't know whether it would have exploded”
22.
inclined to say “This makes no sense!”
And this means that we are at a loss not knowing what reasoning, what
actions go with this expression.
Moreover we believe that he made up a sentence analogous to sentences used
in certain lang. games but not
noticing that he took the point awayt.
In which case do we say that a sentence has point? That comes to asking in which case do we call something a language game. I can only answer. Look at the family of language games that will show you whatever can be shown about the matter. 12) “We can never know what he really sees, for he has his own visual image & I have mine”. & we can't say |
To cite this element you can use the following URL:
BOXVIEW: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-148,34v[4]et35r[1]et35v[1]et36r[1]et36v[1]_d
RDF: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-148,34v[4]et35r[1]et35v[1]et36r[1]et36v[1]_d/rdf
JSON: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-148,34v[4]et35r[1]et35v[1]et36r[1]et36v[1]_d/json