逻辑实证主义、维特根斯坦与《逻辑哲学论》的伦理价值

V. Surovtsev
{"title":"逻辑实证主义、维特根斯坦与《逻辑哲学论》的伦理价值","authors":"V. Surovtsev","doi":"10.5840/EPS20215817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The problem of interconnection of L. Wittgenstein and logical positivism is considered. It is proved that mutual influence did not exist and could not exist due to dissimilarities between the tasks proposed in the “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” and the goals that are basic for the representatives of the Vienna Circle. But the difference between the tasks and the goals does not diminish the value of the philosophy of early Wittgenstein, if even his philosophy cannot be interpreted from the point of view of the Unified Science. But the ethical value of the “Tractatus” is problematic too. It does not contain any positive decisions for the humanities.","PeriodicalId":44031,"journal":{"name":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science-Epistemologiya i Filosofiya Nauki","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Logical Positivism, Wittgenstein and Ethical Value of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus\",\"authors\":\"V. Surovtsev\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/EPS20215817\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The problem of interconnection of L. Wittgenstein and logical positivism is considered. It is proved that mutual influence did not exist and could not exist due to dissimilarities between the tasks proposed in the “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” and the goals that are basic for the representatives of the Vienna Circle. But the difference between the tasks and the goals does not diminish the value of the philosophy of early Wittgenstein, if even his philosophy cannot be interpreted from the point of view of the Unified Science. But the ethical value of the “Tractatus” is problematic too. It does not contain any positive decisions for the humanities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science-Epistemologiya i Filosofiya Nauki\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science-Epistemologiya i Filosofiya Nauki\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/EPS20215817\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science-Epistemologiya i Filosofiya Nauki","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/EPS20215817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了维特根斯坦与逻辑实证主义的内在联系问题。事实证明,相互影响并不存在,也不可能存在,因为《逻辑哲学论》提出的任务与维也纳学派代表的基本目标不一致。但是,任务与目标的不同并没有降低早期维特根斯坦哲学的价值,即使他的哲学不能从统一科学的角度来解释。但《论》的伦理价值也存在问题。它没有对人文学科做出任何积极的决定。
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
Logical Positivism, Wittgenstein and Ethical Value of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
The problem of interconnection of L. Wittgenstein and logical positivism is considered. It is proved that mutual influence did not exist and could not exist due to dissimilarities between the tasks proposed in the “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” and the goals that are basic for the representatives of the Vienna Circle. But the difference between the tasks and the goals does not diminish the value of the philosophy of early Wittgenstein, if even his philosophy cannot be interpreted from the point of view of the Unified Science. But the ethical value of the “Tractatus” is problematic too. It does not contain any positive decisions for the humanities.
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
25.00%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Epistemology & Philosophy of Science is a quarterly peer-reviewed journal established in 2004 by the Institute of Philosophy (Russian Academy of Sciences). It is devoted to the themes in modern epistemology, philosophy of science, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mind. The journal supports the policy of interdisciplinarity. It’s based on the belief that the comprehensive analysis of cultural phenomena couldn’t be completed without focusing on the problems of cognition. The epistemological analysis, however, needs the research results from human, social and natural sciences. Sections of the journal: 1.Editorial 2.Panel Discussion 3.Epistemology and Cognition 4.Language and Mind 5.Vista 6.Case Studies -Science Studies 7.Interdisciplinary Studies 8.Archive 9.Symposium 10.Book Reviews
期刊最新文献
К юбилею Владимира Натановича Поруса Памяти Александра Леонидовича Никифорова (28.04.1940 —29.09.2023) Language of Reality and Reality of Language in Francis Bacon’s Philosophy Francis Bacon and His Fate in the History and Philosophy of Science, 2010–2020 The Baconian Background of Hogben’s Scientific Humanism
×
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