| In the description of the language game ˇin
№
([4|57]) I said that the colours of the
squares corresponded words “r”, “g” etc.,
correspond ed
to the colours of the squares.
But what's
does this correspondence consist in how far ˇin
what sense can one say that certain colours of the squares
cor[e|r]e[p|s]pond to these
signs[,|?]
ˇFor
[T|t]he explanation in ([4|5]7) only made a
connection between these signs and certain words in our
ˇordinary language (the names of colours).
–
Well, it was assumed that the use of the signs was taught
38 red square,
“b” where there is a black square,
etc.?
But what if he makes a mistake in his description and wrongly
says “r” where
[r|t]here is a black square;
what's is then the criterion
that shows that here for this was a
ˇbeing a mistake? –
Or does the fact th[t|a]t “r” indicates
“[“|‘]r[”|’]'s
indicating standingch
for ˇstands for” a red
square” consist in the fact,
◇◇◇
mean that
the people who use the language always have a red square before
their minds when they use the sign “r”? In order [t|T]o see more clear[e|l]y we have should here, as in innumerable ˇa great number of similar cases, to keep look at the details of the processes what really happens in detail before our eyes
If I am inclined to assume ˇtake the view that a mouse comes into existence is produced springs, by spontaneous generation,
ˇBut we have yet got to see [W|w]hat it [k|i]s, however, that hinders, in ˇdoing philosophy, such an examination of makes it so difficult to scrutinize these details,. is something we have yet to come to understand. // to see what it is that sets itself against our scrutinizing these details, when we are doing philosophy. // |
To cite this element you can use the following URL:
BOXVIEW: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ts-226,37[3]et38[1]et38[2]et38[3]et38[4]_d
RDF: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ts-226,37[3]et38[1]et38[2]et38[3]et38[4]_d/rdf
JSON: http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/BTE/Ts-226,37[3]et38[1]et38[2]et38[3]et38[4]_d/json