>whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent u wot m8?

>>9350498
this nigga looks EXACTLY like one of my professors who was in some type of accident and shuffles around. maybe it was the time machine

sh now

Analytic a shit.

>>9350498
"If you don't know what you're talking about then shut the fuck up."

>>9350498

he wrote a book outlining the limits of meaningful thought/speech, and then recommends that you not try to transgress those limits.

>>9350647
>>9350675
Yea but he also then spent his entire life disproving that theory.

>>9350696
Yes, after a like decade long hiatus during which he honestly thought he'd said it all, before freaking out a bit and then changing his mind

>>9350696

funnily enough the last line of the tractatus is probably one of the few he would still agree with in his later period, just for different reasons

Should I read the Tractatus at all or skip it and read PI instead?

>>9350722
Second this

>>9350722

you should read it, it is pretty short and parts of PI will make much more sense having read TLP first

if you don't have any background in formal logic, frege or russell, parts of it might be tricky though

>>9350745
I had a senester of logic 101/102 this year- basic propositional and predicate logic. Do i stand a chance at TLP?

>>9350751

you will be mostly fine if you understand formal logic up to and including quantifiers, but you will miss out a bit on the set theory parts and the bits where he explicitly references russell and frege and their own approaches to logic. also, the logic in tlp is a bit idiosyncratic. these are mostly just details though, you'll be able to get the big picture

>>9350722
PI is honestly a fucking mess of a book. It's just a collection of semi-random thoughts that amounts to u cant know nuffin expressed in sophisticated matter.. Tractatus is very pleasant to read and think about.

>>9350877
>u cant know nuffin expressed in sophisticated matter.

Wrong. Kill yourself.

>>9350722
PI is in a lot of ways a continuation and in a lot of other ways a refutation of tractatus. Imo the best (time wise) way is to understand through secondary sources like sep what tractatus is about, then read and study PI.

HOWEVER if you arent aware of the historical conversation leading to wittgenstein you might as wel read batman comics or some shit, it wont mean shit to you

>>9350498

This makes no sense. If you can't speak about it, then you're already silent anyway.

>>9350498
he wrote a whole book (tractatus) about all the things you can talk about, then everything that wasnt covered by the book (notably meta philosophy like "do morals exist", also the book itself was "nonsense" according to the book), one should stop talking about.

He was telling you not to make this thread

>>9350823
Thanks /lit/izen, gonna take a dive into TLP

he meant that you cant talk while you eat.
but you can talk about food (while not eating)

File: thinking.jpg (32KB, 428x410px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 428x410px

>>9351296

>>9351178
this isn't even close to being correct.

Has anyone in this thread actually read Wittgenstein or do they just regurgitate what they see said about him on lit?

>>9350722
Start with Ray Monk's biography of Wittgenstein.

>>9351177
Lol'd, here's a (you)

>>9351177
If by can't you mean unable completely, yes. If you mean unable properly, then no.

>>9352269
I've had a bunch of good discussions on W here, but I'm not going to fucking spam every thread that asks this. There are so many W threads daily.

>>9352864
reading this right now. its actually incredible, but im surprised what a spoilt difficult brat wittgensten actually was.