Get Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus Generated By Ludwig Wittgenstein Readable In Version

beautiful little book about language and thought, done in by Wittgenstein's lack of mathematical training to this point it was written in the trenches of the AustroHungarian ostfront and the Italian POW camps of Cassino, and published only with the help of Russell and Ogden indeed, Ogden gave the book its title.
Look to the sitelink Philosophical Investigations for "Wittgenstein II", the much more useful side of Ludwig's career well after he'd left Logical Positivism behind, but read the Tractatus for some of the most breathtaking, heartjarring pearls of the early century.
It's not quite epigrams, and it neither follows the rules of deduction nor constitutes a valid derivation, but from that magnificent, syntacticallyenigmatic first line:

The world is everything that is the case.


to the sweeping, single sentence of the seventh and final chapter:

Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.


you'll admire Ludwig for his verbal derringdo, if nothing else, An excellent transcription is available freely online sitelinkhere, if you'd like, ترجمهی بسیار بینظیری داشت که فهم کتابی به این سنگینی را برایم آسانتر کرد خصوصا آموزشی که برای نادها داده بود.
این رساله صرفا بابی بود برای ورود به فلسفهی ویتگنشتاین از طریق بام ذهن خودش. هیچراهی بهتر از مطالعهی خود شخص برای شناخت وی نمیشناسم. ویتگنشتاین گزارههای مهمی را در این کتاب شرح داد و ذهن استدلالی صرف خویش را برای خوانندگان منعکس کرد. این رساله نشان میدهد که ریاضی و فلسفه بهیکدیگر نزدیکاند نه از آن حیث که فلسفه بهمثابه ریاضی یا بلعکس بررسی میشوند بلکه نمادگذاری و بررسی صورت مسئله صرفا بهعنوان صورت مسئله و نه حقیقتش امری جالب توجه در شاخههای جدید ریاضیست. In, the SF writer William Gibson published sitelinkAgrippa a book of the dead in floppydisk form, a poem about his late father and the Mementoish evanescence of memory, which encrypted itself after reading i.
e. you could only read it once, A rarer, analog edition was even printed with photosensitive chemicals that would degrade the ink upon exposure to light, Two copies had to be sent to the Library of Congress, one to read so it could be catalogued, the other to be archived, forever unread.


Wittgenstein's Tractatus LogicoPhilosophicus, as appetizing a read as frozen porridge on a stick or those "Nutra Loaf" foodbricks served to SuperMax inmates as punishment for weaponizing their fecal matter, selfimmolates in a like fashion.
It is a tautologythreaded suicidevest smuggled into the Agora of philosophy, a "friendly fire" apostasy in the

heart of Cambridge reminiscent of that daft scene in Independence Day where Jeff Goldblum sends a trojan virus back to the mothership a death meme, a killshot.


For afterpages of eyelidtwitching mental strain we are told, with barely a smirk, that everything we've just read is nonsense, because guess what dipshits, all sitelink"philosophy" is nonsense.
The Tractatus is a scaffold which, once ascended, can be junked like the Erector Set of our epistemic childhood,

"My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used themas stepsto climb up beyond them.
He must, so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it, ".

Wittgenstein is like some Zen asshat who makes us hold a stress position forhours on a tree stump in the pouring rain to instill chastened humility before an ungraspable cosmic order.
Led through the inspectiontunnels and antechambers of a vast selfannihilating hall of mirrors, we arrive at the shattered terminus of epistemological overthrow that punked Bertrand Russell so hard his pipe whirligigged in his mouth like Popeye's.


Those who've dragged the lake of metaphysics know how exasperating this type of writing can be: the rectilinear sightlines of definition, thesis, and axiom springing the trap of an illusory cyborg'seye view of atomic reality, the circuitous maze of tautology and selfreference which seems to lead everywhere and nowhere.
Maddeningly, Wittgenstein never provides a clear definition of "object," and so the elucidatory nucleus of the Tractatus itself becomes a sucking vortex of fathomless unknowing, pulling everything into thin air like John Lithgow shooting through the glass at that goblin tearing up the wing.


A gnomic breviary for androids, prequel to the immeasurably richer Philosophical Investigations, it exemplifies the positivist mania Wittgenstein largely discarded like a cicada moulting its exoskeleton.
As enchanting as a circuitboard schematic for hardware that doesn't function, the Tractatus is a victim of its own tense certitudes, For the "picture theory" of realism, presuming to mirror the deep structure of the logical universe through recourse to atomic "simples," is no mere coding error, but rather the grand boffo Mega Blooper at the perplexed heart ofyears of philosophic tailchasing.
The burning bridge to the postTractatus Wittgenstein cognitivetherapist of languagegames high and low appears in proposition,: "Philosophy aims at the logical clarification of thoughts, Philosophy is not a body of doctrine but an activity, " We inoculate against disease by introducing antigens into our biochem to produce antibodies, We study the history of philosophy to keep from contaminating ourselves with the wellmeaningbutpoobrained fallacies of our noble precursors, Fallacies most of us would embrace on faith sans the contingency of being wisedup latecomers to the game, Which is another way of saying that contemporary fallacies, which no doubt exist, are largely invisible to us, Fish cannot grasp the concept of water, Fallacious cognition fuels our motivational selfesteem just as caloric intake fuels our body systems,

And so, like Gottlob Frege postscripting Vol, II of his Foundations of Arithmetic to the effect that sitelinkRussell's Paradox had undermined his entire project, Wittgenstein sweeps a resigned hand across the Tibetan sandpainting of his Cambridge apprenticeship, downsizing "the Philosopher" to mere critic, therapist, dilettante, revisionist, and pedagogue.


Which is, I think, an eminently sane place to be,

اول شرح رو خوندم بعد خود کتاب رو.
شرح از چند جنبه خوبه: نثر فارسی نویسنده پخته و جافتاده است. جز چند اصطلاح نامانوس با نثری روان و درخور شرحی فلسفی رو به برو هستیم. موضوعات عمده رساله منطقی فلسفی از هم تفکیک شده اند و جداگانه محل بحث قرار گرفته اند که این موجب انسجام در مطالعه می شود. اصطلاح گزینی ها به استادی انجام گرفته اند. ترجمه ی متن رساله با کم ترین ابهام و بیشترین دقت ممکن صورت گرفته است. مباحثی که مطرح شده است به خوبی مورد بحث قرار گرفته اند هرچند در برخی موارد سوال هایی در ذهنم شکل گرفت که شارح آنها را بی جواب گذاشته است. شارح به ادبیات موجود در باب رساله اشراف کافی دارد و بعضا ارجاع های سودمندی به کتاب های دیگر داده است. من با اینکه با سنت فلسفه تحلیلی همنوایی ندارم که دلیلش بر می گردد به رهیافت عمده ی فلسفه ی تحلیلی در خصوص نحوه ی تقرب به مسائل فلسفی از خواندن این شرح هم چیزهای زیادی یاد گرفتم هم علاقه ای در من ایجاد شد تا دست کم ویتگنشتاین را ناخوانده بر جای نگذارم.
منتها خود رساله کماکان برایم مبهم است. کتاب کتاب دشواری است و شارح محترم به برخی از مفاهیم کتاب یا اصلا نپرداخته یا اینکه من نتوانسته ام شرح او را خوب درک کنم. ولی گمان می کنم شرح جامع نبوده است.
من این کتاب را بسیار پسندیدم و بیش از همه از این لذت بردم که یک نویسنده ایرانی شرحی بر فلسفه فیلسوفی غربی می نویسد که نه تنها به معنای واقعی کلمه "تالیف" است بلکه تالیفی است عمدتا قابل فهم و به دور از خودنمایی ها و ظاهرسازی های مرسوم در کتب تالیفی متداول در زمینه فلسفه در مملکت ما.for writing this apparently while serving in WW

because not enough examples, That would've helped to clear up a ton of confusion for example, what exactly is the Noperator

because I CAN

Final grade:/.