{"title":"维特根斯坦的哲学学徒/译。来自英格兰。V. V. Tselishchev","authors":"V. V. Tselishchev","doi":"10.25206/2542-0488-2022-7-4-115-129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The years since the publication of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus have produced a good many interpretations of its central tenets. Time has produced something of a consensus concerning the nature of the Tractarian criticisms of Russell’s philosophy. Recent work on Russell’s philosophy of logic reveals, however, that the agreed account of Tractarian criticisms relies upon characterizing Russell with positions he did not hold.","PeriodicalId":34375,"journal":{"name":"Omskii nauchnyi vestnik Seriia Obshchestvo Istoriia Sovremennost''","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wittgenstein’s Tractarian Apprenticeship / trans. from Engl. V. V. Tselishchev\",\"authors\":\"V. V. Tselishchev\",\"doi\":\"10.25206/2542-0488-2022-7-4-115-129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The years since the publication of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus have produced a good many interpretations of its central tenets. Time has produced something of a consensus concerning the nature of the Tractarian criticisms of Russell’s philosophy. Recent work on Russell’s philosophy of logic reveals, however, that the agreed account of Tractarian criticisms relies upon characterizing Russell with positions he did not hold.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34375,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Omskii nauchnyi vestnik Seriia Obshchestvo Istoriia Sovremennost''\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Omskii nauchnyi vestnik Seriia Obshchestvo Istoriia Sovremennost''\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25206/2542-0488-2022-7-4-115-129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Omskii nauchnyi vestnik Seriia Obshchestvo Istoriia Sovremennost''","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25206/2542-0488-2022-7-4-115-129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Wittgenstein’s Tractarian Apprenticeship / trans. from Engl. V. V. Tselishchev
The years since the publication of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus have produced a good many interpretations of its central tenets. Time has produced something of a consensus concerning the nature of the Tractarian criticisms of Russell’s philosophy. Recent work on Russell’s philosophy of logic reveals, however, that the agreed account of Tractarian criticisms relies upon characterizing Russell with positions he did not hold.