Showing, Not Saying, Negation and Falsehood: Establishing Kimhi’s Two-Way Logical Capacities with Wittgenstein’s Samples

Q2 Arts and Humanities Nordic Wittgenstein Review Pub Date : 2023-10-22 DOI:10.15845/nwr.v12.3645
Thomas Henry Raysmith
{"title":"Showing, Not Saying, Negation and Falsehood: Establishing Kimhi’s Two-Way Logical Capacities with Wittgenstein’s Samples","authors":"Thomas Henry Raysmith","doi":"10.15845/nwr.v12.3645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, Irad Kimhi has argued that negation and falsehood can be made intelligible by understanding assertions/judgements as acts of two-way logical capacities. These are capacities that are, at the same time, for (1) positive and negative assertions/judgements and (2) positive and negative facts. Kimhi’s account of negation and falsehood, however, faces severe problems. I argue that these problems can be resolved, and that a new understanding of cases of negation and falsehood can be achieved, by regarding two-way logical capacities for assertion/judgement and facts as established and undergirded by what Ludwig Wittgenstein calls “samples”. The standard metre sample, for instance, establishes and undergirds the capacity for asserting that something, x, is one metre long (meaning: x is like the standard metre in length). At the same time, it establishes and undergirds the capacity for the fact that x is one metre long (when x is like the standard metre in length). As I explain, invoking samples means we cannot say, as Kimhi wants to, what assertion/judgement, negation, and facts, in general, are but can only show what they are, one case at a time. This, however, is a boon not a disadvantage.","PeriodicalId":31828,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Wittgenstein Review","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Wittgenstein Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15845/nwr.v12.3645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recently, Irad Kimhi has argued that negation and falsehood can be made intelligible by understanding assertions/judgements as acts of two-way logical capacities. These are capacities that are, at the same time, for (1) positive and negative assertions/judgements and (2) positive and negative facts. Kimhi’s account of negation and falsehood, however, faces severe problems. I argue that these problems can be resolved, and that a new understanding of cases of negation and falsehood can be achieved, by regarding two-way logical capacities for assertion/judgement and facts as established and undergirded by what Ludwig Wittgenstein calls “samples”. The standard metre sample, for instance, establishes and undergirds the capacity for asserting that something, x, is one metre long (meaning: x is like the standard metre in length). At the same time, it establishes and undergirds the capacity for the fact that x is one metre long (when x is like the standard metre in length). As I explain, invoking samples means we cannot say, as Kimhi wants to, what assertion/judgement, negation, and facts, in general, are but can only show what they are, one case at a time. This, however, is a boon not a disadvantage.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
显示、不说、否定与虚妄:用维特根斯坦的样本建立基米的双向逻辑能力
最近,Irad Kimhi认为,通过将断言/判断理解为双向逻辑能力的行为,可以使否定和谬误变得可理解。这些能力同时是(1)肯定的和否定的断言/判断,(2)肯定的和否定的事实。然而,Kimhi对否定和虚假的描述面临着严重的问题。我认为这些问题是可以解决的,并且可以通过将断言/判断和事实的双向逻辑能力视为路德维希·维特根斯坦所谓的“样本”来建立和巩固,从而实现对否定和虚假案例的新理解。例如,标准米样本建立并巩固了断言某物x是一米长的能力(意思是:x就像标准米的长度)。同时,它建立并巩固了x是一米长这一事实的能力(当x类似于标准长度时)。正如我所解释的那样,引用样本意味着我们不能像Kimhi想的那样说,断言/判断、否定和事实一般是什么,而只能一次一个案例地显示它们是什么。然而,这是一件好事而不是坏事。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nordic Wittgenstein Review
Nordic Wittgenstein Review Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
Cavell’s Must We Mean What We Say? at 50 , edited by Greg Chase, Juliet Floyd and Sandra Laugier Wittgenstein and Aesthetics, by Hanne Appelqvist Wittgenstein in Alethea Graham’s diary (1929-1930), and new data on the audience of his Lecture on Ethics and LT 1930 class Ethical Inquiries after Wittgenstein, edited by Salla Aldrin Salskov, Ondřej Beran and Nora Hämäläinen “What Line Can’t Be Measured With a Ruler?”: Riddles and Concept-Formation in Mathematics and Aesthetics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1