Alison Vander Mandeli
{"title":"WITTGENSTEIN, ONTOLOGIA E PANTEÍSMO","authors":"Alison Vander Mandeli","doi":"10.5216/PHI.V22I2.41846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his book This complicated form of life , Newton Garver presents a curious interpretation of Wittgensteins’s early philosophy. Based on some passages of Notebooks and, especially, in considerations about Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus ’ 'ontology', the commentator concludes that wittgensteinian philosophy, at least in its first phase, implies a pantheistic mystical-religious position. More precisely, Garver uses an abductive reasoning for (supposedly) show that pantheism would be the best explanation for the fact that there are, according to him, two ontologies in the Tractatus , namely, an ontology of facts and an one of objects. The aim of this text is to present and refute this interpretation. After reconstruct in detail the Garver’s position, I will present two arguments against it. At first, I will show that the commentator’s interpretation implies an unacceptable idea, according to which the pantheistic God would be founded rather than the foundation , as is commonly understood in the pantheistic traditions. In the second, I will show that it is possible to explain plausibly the 'ontology' of facts and objects present in the Tractatus , without resorting to pantheism.","PeriodicalId":30368,"journal":{"name":"Philosophos Revista de Filosofia","volume":"22 1","pages":"11-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophos Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5216/PHI.V22I2.41846","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

牛顿·加弗在他的《复杂的生命形式》一书中,对维特根斯坦的早期哲学提出了一种奇怪的解释。根据《札记》的一些段落,特别是对《逻辑哲学论》“本体论”的思考,评论者得出结论:维特根斯坦哲学,至少在其第一阶段,隐含着一种泛神论的神秘主义宗教立场。更准确地说,Garver使用了一种溯因推理(据说)来证明泛神论是对他认为《论》中存在两个本体论的事实的最好解释,即事实本体论和对象本体论。本文的目的是提出并反驳这种解释。在详细重建了加弗的立场之后,我将提出两个反对它的论点。首先,我将表明,注释者的解释暗示了一种不可接受的想法,根据这种想法,泛神论的上帝将被建立,而不是基础,正如泛神论传统中普遍理解的那样。在第二章中,我将证明,不诉诸泛神论,就有可能合理地解释《论》中存在的事实和对象的“本体论”。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
WITTGENSTEIN, ONTOLOGIA E PANTEÍSMO
In his book This complicated form of life , Newton Garver presents a curious interpretation of Wittgensteins’s early philosophy. Based on some passages of Notebooks and, especially, in considerations about Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus ’ 'ontology', the commentator concludes that wittgensteinian philosophy, at least in its first phase, implies a pantheistic mystical-religious position. More precisely, Garver uses an abductive reasoning for (supposedly) show that pantheism would be the best explanation for the fact that there are, according to him, two ontologies in the Tractatus , namely, an ontology of facts and an one of objects. The aim of this text is to present and refute this interpretation. After reconstruct in detail the Garver’s position, I will present two arguments against it. At first, I will show that the commentator’s interpretation implies an unacceptable idea, according to which the pantheistic God would be founded rather than the foundation , as is commonly understood in the pantheistic traditions. In the second, I will show that it is possible to explain plausibly the 'ontology' of facts and objects present in the Tractatus , without resorting to pantheism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Tropeços da igualdade no caminho da natureza à civilidade Quatro formas de silenciamento fundamento moral à forma da normatividade Descartes: a dúvida e suas dívidas A relevância da distinção kantiana entre virtude e boa vontade para o debate contemporâneo sobre a ética das virtudes
×
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