Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Space, philosophy: various discussions deal, among others, with the question whether the space is absolute or whether empty space is possible. In different sciences, multi-dimensional spaces with certain properties are used to better calculate like Hilbert spaces in the theory of relativity or multidimensional spaces in mathematical nodal theory. No ontological assumptions are made. See also substantivalism, relativism, movement, absoluteness, compactness, conceptual space, dimensions, logical space, four-dimensionalism._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Ludwig Wittgenstein on Space - Dictionary of Arguments
Hintikka I 90/91 Language/object/phenomenological/Wittgenstein/early/Hintikka: in the early Wittgenstein the language is based on the visual space and deals with immediately given phenomena. We can see that in the writings of the middle period. I 179 Space/field/absolute/localization/individuation/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: there must be absolute points in visual space, otherwise one could not tell if a spot remains in the same place or not - that is, points in visual space have a logical form - (1931) - Hintikka: therefore they can be Tractatus objects. >Objects, >Things. I 99 Subjective/subjectivity/Wittgenstein: "..another does not see the objects in the same way as I do. Does this mean that the visual space, I am talking about is mine? So that it is subjective? No: it has been merely seen subjective here, and it is opposed to an objective space, but which is only a construction, with the visual space as a base "(VII 71, 100). I 110 ff Subject/Tractatus/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: Question: if the objects of the Tractatus are really objects of acquaintance (direct experience) why has Wittgenstein never mentioned this? >Acquaintance. I 111 Tractatus 2.0131 "the spatial object must lie in the infinite space. (A point in space is an argument location). Although the spot in the visual field does not need to be red, but it must have a color, it has, so to speak, a color space around it. >Colour. I 167 ff Space/Space terms/logic/Tractatus/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: the same incompatibility (incompatibility as of the color terms) is also raised by the space concepts). The same color spot cannot be located at different places of the space. Wittgenstein: But that is no problem. The space is for him a form of spatial objects. (Tractatus 2.0251: "Space and time are forms of objects".) I 179 Space/visual space/absolute/location/individuation/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: there must be absolute points in the visual space, otherwise you could not tell if a spot remains in the same place or not - that is, points in visual space have a logical form - (1931) - Hintikka: therefore they can be Tractatus objects. >Absoluteness. I 215 Visual space/seeing/Wittgenstein/Hintikka: the visual space has its independent reality - it itself has no subject - it is autonomous. --- II 36 Infinite divisibility and space/Wittgenstein: it has been asserted that space is not infinitely divisible. However, regarding the possibilities of the experiment one cannot prove anything. II 39 Search/explore/invent/Wittgenstein: a space is not searched for - searched are things in space. - The room is everything, which one must be certain about in order to ask a question - what you look for, must be fully describable. - On the contrary: logical discovery: different from finding something in the space. - If we could describe this, we would have already found it. II 89 Space/visual space/Wittgenstein: a) visual space: here it is pointless to say something would look like, as if it were further away than the moon - b) physical space: here it makes sense - if we saw how the moon gets smaller, we could not say that it goes away in the visual space, but in the physical - this is a distinction between sense-data and physical object - but useful in both spaces: that A of B is equidistant from C. - We do not need a theory to bring our knowledge of sense data with beliefs about objects in compliance - additionally, what we mean when we say "the penny is round" could also mean that it looks elliptical. - Visual space: here, a circular piece canot look straight - physical space: here it can look straight._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
W II L. Wittgenstein Wittgenstein’s Lectures 1930-32, from the notes of John King and Desmond Lee, Oxford 1980 German Edition: Vorlesungen 1930-35 Frankfurt 1989 W III L. Wittgenstein The Blue and Brown Books (BB), Oxford 1958 German Edition: Das Blaue Buch - Eine Philosophische Betrachtung Frankfurt 1984 W IV L. Wittgenstein Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (TLP), 1922, C.K. Ogden (trans.), London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Originally published as “Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung”, in Annalen der Naturphilosophische, XIV (3/4), 1921. German Edition: Tractatus logico-philosophicus Frankfurt/M 1960 Hintikka I Jaakko Hintikka Merrill B. Hintikka Investigating Wittgenstein German Edition: Untersuchungen zu Wittgenstein Frankfurt 1996 Hintikka II Jaakko Hintikka Merrill B. Hintikka The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic Dordrecht 1989 |
||
> Counter arguments against Wittgenstein
> Counter arguments in relation to Space
