This video series was beatiful. I am reading Tractatus and without this guide i would be lost. Just this three videos is enough to understand the ontological part of the book. Great work, please do more videos about Phi.
I'm rather confused here by how "the world" is being modeled relative to "reality," as if reality includes the whole of logical space, the world being but a subset. How can I make sense of W.'s claim that "The sum-total of reality is the world" (2.063)? It's not even clear to me whether W. consistently uses "the world" to describe only what exists, since he sometimes suggests that facts are both positive (existing) and negative (non-existing) and clearly asserts that "The facts in logical space are the world." I find even the most basic terms in this text to be maddeningly ambiguous. I enjoy your presentation all the same.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I finally get it! I read Monk's biography as a preparation for the Tractatus, but when I attempted to read it I still felt I wasn't really getting it. I've watched many lectures and still thought I was missing it, as it all just sounded trivially true. Your video series just laid it out, and now (I think) I understand what differentiates Wittgenstein' thesis. Thanks so much for this, it really means a lot to me.
i've seen a couple of really good videos on the tractatus, but they always put too much emphasis on the logical-mathematical aspects, and kind of grace over the more philosophical stuff... these videos are all great for that!
This video series was beatiful. I am reading Tractatus and without this guide i would be lost. Just this three videos is enough to understand the ontological part of the book. Great work, please do more videos about Phi.
men like you save my semesters
I'm rather confused here by how "the world" is being modeled relative to "reality," as if reality includes the whole of logical space, the world being but a subset. How can I make sense of W.'s claim that "The sum-total of reality is the world" (2.063)? It's not even clear to me whether W. consistently uses "the world" to describe only what exists, since he sometimes suggests that facts are both positive (existing) and negative (non-existing) and clearly asserts that "The facts in logical space are the world." I find even the most basic terms in this text to be maddeningly ambiguous. I enjoy your presentation all the same.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I finally get it! I read Monk's biography as a preparation for the Tractatus, but when I attempted to read it I still felt I wasn't really getting it. I've watched many lectures and still thought I was missing it, as it all just sounded trivially true. Your video series just laid it out, and now (I think) I understand what differentiates Wittgenstein' thesis. Thanks so much for this, it really means a lot to me.
Great series! Can't wait to watch more of your videos!
Very impressive and precise lecture :D Absolutely inspiring. Really looking forward to the next episodes!
Great 3 parts. You Need more views. You do a much better job at explaining compared to other vids and your foundation is solid.
Is there a difference between imaginary world and possible world? That sparkled my interest. Really good video.
i've seen a couple of really good videos on the tractatus, but they always put too much emphasis on the logical-mathematical aspects, and kind of grace over the more philosophical stuff... these videos are all great for that!
Are atomic facts, bereft of context, the only components of truth? Without context, can facts be false?