Collapse

Annotate using Feed The Pundit

In general: When such propositions are analysed, while the words ‘thing’, ‘fact’ etc. will disappear, there will appear instead of them a new symbol,

of the same form as the one of which we are speaking
which is a thing, or fact, respectively

; & hence it will be at once obvious that we cannot get the one ˇkind of prop. from the other by substitution.
In our language names are not things: we don't know what they are: all we know is that they are of a different type from relations etc. etc. … The type of a symbol of

Ms-301,9

a relation is partly fixed by type of symbol of thing, since a symbol of latter type must occur in it.

(2015–) Wittgenstein Source Bergen Nachlass Edition (WS-BNE). Edited by the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen under the direction of Alois Pichler. In: Wittgenstein Source, curated by Alois Pichler (2009–) and Joseph Wang-Kathrein (2020–). (N) Bergen: WAB.

To cite this element you can use the following URL:

BOXVIEW: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-301,8[3]et9[1]_d

RDF: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-301,8[3]et9[1]_d/rdf

JSON: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-301,8[3]et9[1]_d/json