Collapse

Annotate using Feed The Pundit

Take p.q & q. When you write p.q in the a–b notation, it is impossible to see from the symbol alone that q follows from it; for if you were to

interpret
substitute

the true-pole for as the false, the same symbol would stand for p⌵q, from wh. q doesn't follow. But the moment you say wh. symbols are tautologies, it at once becomes possible to see from th[is|e] fact, ˇthat they are & the ˇoriginal symbol that q does follow.

(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-301,17[1]_d

RDF: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-301,17[1]_d/rdf

JSON: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ms-301,17[1]_d/json