Wittgenstein in 7 Minutes

Revised yet again in light of more helpful comments from Wittgensteinism . I highly recommend his YouTube channel to anyone wanting to know (a lot) more about Wittgenstein.

[TheGypsyranger]

Well i am now going to have to read tractacus. This guy is now my new cutting edge. He is lloking at the juncture between the formless and the formed, i think. This is excellent because that is also where i am interested.

Thanks for the vid! Now to watch the second half.

[Frege]

Thanks for all the comments. I've now subscribed to your channel (only my 3rd ever subscription) and recommend it to anyone interested in philosophy.

Mark

[Wittgensteinism]

Excuse me... but there's still one last problem with the video...
You forgot to tell people to subscribe to my channel!
lol, j/k I truly admire your tenacity for accuracy.
It's a virtuous nature that reflects Wittgenstein's own desire to be a virtuous fellow.
Well done sir!

[jameserret]

I also think the inclusion of Wittgenstein's 'diary'-example would be appropriate, as it reveals that private sensations cannot serve as ostensive criteria in definitions, as there is no measurement possibility, and thus no frame of reference for comparable sensations. To me, this is the most convincing argument against the existence of a private language. This is just my personal opinion, though :)

[ecaepevolhturt]

I wonder what he would of thought of fuzzy logic.

[chanm]

Great video, thanks! The music was far too loud though. Made it more difficult to focus on the slides.

[henriquerondinelli]

Great philosopher, great song, great video.

[jameserret]

Hey,
I really enjoyed your video, it is very informative!
However, I do think the phrasing in 3:29 is a littlemconfusing. It appears as though you state that the NAND-operator can be used to construct quantifiers and equality relations. In my personal interpretation, Wittgenstein showed that all sentences in predicate logic, thus (possibly) involving quantifiers and functions (because of which they may be of infinite length) are equivalent to a sentence in which NAND is the only operator used..

[am]

@Wittgensteinism negation of row one? I have seen rain with a beautiful sunny weather ;).

[MrCarllauren]

Your example..What he said is that a fridge can have a different meaning. For example a cupboard outside in the cold could mean fridge also ...depending on the perception and use/intention of that word by the user. Now...he also used the sun and earths movement in an actual example. I deduced and added to this also, Left =right, up=down, artificial world, artificial solutions (meaningless co-existence) etc.
Now there is a gospel of Philip, Gospel of truth, apocryphon of James..this corroborates.

[Wittgensteinism]

@am101171 But have you ever seen it rain and not rain at the same time in the same place in the same sense?
In other words, have you ever seen a logical contradiction?

[Wittgensteinism]

@MrDustinmcphate In a logical disjunction only one of the variables needs to be true in order for the disjunction to be true. So obviously if BOTH are true then it ought to be true. But a clever one might ask, "But what if the variables are mutually exclusive?" (which can certainly be the case). E.g. It's either raining or it's not". Obviously BOTH of these cannot be true, because if the one is true, the other MUST be be false.
So the question is... what becomes of our truth value for row two?

[MrDustinmcphate]

at the 2:35 mark your truth table says that when P is true and Q is true then "or" is false, but beside it you state that it is true.

[am]

@Wittgensteinism No not really, I was just playing around :) . I am currently reading tractatus and it is beautiful, I am taking my time, as I have to reared all the time not to loose all the subtleties. regards.

[Wittgensteinism]

@am101171 Well, i should actually correct myself, because i suppose that it's possible to be raining and a clear day. In other words, they're not as mutually exclusive as i thought. And if they were exact negations of each other, then we would represent them as P and Not P, instead of P and Q. This would solve the problem.
And don't worry, i too had to reread almost every line in the Tractatus as i was reading it.
I think one would have to inhuman not to do this :)

[slayerrules]

I understand what he was saying, I just don't understand how you would apply this to areas of philosophy. I've had Wittgensteinian thinkers argue for all sorts of things, especially relativism. I just don't understand how the ideas in this video would translate to other philosophical issues.

[MikeWdamn]

Sigur ros + Wittgenstein. Cool video :)

[MrCarllauren]

Are you READY for TRUTH..then revise the videos (and such) that I have listed below. Wittgenstein eventually started to find his way to the truth in these Gospels. It always happens this way...HE FULL TRUTH will be found in these books.
PLEASE no negative comments to me. Watch them if you want to. I am only furthering your INSIGHT or amusement..take your pick.
Every philosopher worth anything will always point you towards the truth. You have to complete the Journey. Wittgenstein does this.

[MrCarllauren]

Start with the Gospel of Phillip. Even Wittgenstein would have been excited beyond measure by this Gospel. Wittgenstein's account is the beginning of thinking as an originator of ideas..the seeking of truth which can only be attained from a starting point of zero. "I assume nothing". Original clarity identifying the symbolic in truth within and without. The Gospel of Philip will blow your you are ready for that kind of knowledge...Source knowledge..Pls dont despise me. Thank you.