Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus book review: Words and Images

My (attempted) review of Ludwig Wittgenstein's landmark work, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, the would-be solution to all problems philosophical, and what is, with virtually no contest, the hardest single work I've ever read in my life.
#tractatuslogicophilosophicus #wittgenstein #ludwigwittgenstein #philosophy #logic #books #literature #booktube #bookreview

[@ShadowedAgony]

An eternally bewildering work. Thanks for taking a stab at it. Wittgenstein really tried to end philosophy, to the point that he wanted his philosophy to be the last you read. To have a work of philosophy disregard all philosophy, including itself is quite amazing.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

Hey, go big or go home, right? XD Even if I don't fully understand it, I can, if nothing else, at least respect the ambition. :)

[@TheloniousCube]

I believe that the Philosophical Investigations has been more influential and is more what his reputation rests on. although it was not published during his lifetime, he was preparing it for publication (unlike many of the other posthumous works) and was something that he wanted people to read. I highly recommend it!

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

Yeah, the Philosophical Investigations probably carry more weight, since the Tractatus arguably didn't succeed in being the final word in philosophy, although I think that the Tractatus maybe garnered a larger reaction, if only because of how grandiose its claims were. I would like to read the Philosophical Investigations, but that's significantly more expensive than the Tractatus! XD

[@TheloniousCube]

@@TH3F4LC0Nx Yes, it looks like even the used copies are pricey now. I'm surprised. Maybe look again in summer after students sell their copies

[@TheloniousCube]

Great review. Informative and entertaining.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

Thank you! :)

[@legrantmoore5264]

I knew you were referring to Wittgenstein in your previous post. It is also on my shelf. Have not read it yet. Also got his philosophical investigations. Now that you've done it I think I will tackle the tractatus this year after I'm done with Infinite Jest. Always difficult to choose when to read what haha.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

I kinda want to read Philosophical Investigations too, but that one was way more expensive than this. XD And I hope you enjoy Infinite Jest. That's like the one postmodern novel that I really and truly love. :D And yeah, it can be hard to decide when to read what. I'm over here trying to meticulously plan out these reads weeks in advance. XD

[@legrantmoore5264]

@@TH3F4LC0Nx I am only 70 pages in so far. So far mostly enjoying it. Some odd chapters here and there which seem nonsensical, but I like his sadness-tinged humour. Your reading pace is quite impressive, don't know how you manage it. I go through some mental dips, which is not always conducive to reading conscientiousness. But channels like yours surely help! Reminds one to get on with it, so much to do and so little time haha.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

@@legrantmoore5264 I think with IJ it takes about 150 - 200 pages for it to really start coming together. He effectively introduces a number of plot threads in quick succession, and then comes back around to them later, and then kinda does the same thing again later on, only a little more quickly. Even if you're not sure about the years (I wasn't), after a certain point the plot really isn't too terribly hard to grasp. It definitely is a book where you're kind of laughing and crying at the same time. Still, it's hands down the most fun reading experience I've ever had, after it started clicking. :)

[@SmallSpaceCorgi]

I just picked up a copy of the Tractatus in the edition you're using. It's a lovely little edition, and I want to look for others in the Benediction Classics.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

Not much in the way of supplementary material, but it sure was affordable! :D

[@SmallSpaceCorgi]

Always a good thing! @@TH3F4LC0Nx

[@SmallSpaceCorgi]

Seriously great choice!

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

What I understood of it has definitely changed me; all I can say. XD

[@mehwhatever9726]

In other words, if we havent witnessed the truth about what universe actually is, where did it come from and how it ends, or if it ends, we cannot make any meaningful assumptions on what the world and our existance in it is supposed to mean?

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

That is, in essence, what I took Wittgenstein's thesis to be. We have no idea why things are as they are, so we cannot do much else than simply state that they are. I think Wittgenstein's conception of philosophy was much closer to a science. Science often uses what is to make assertions about what will be, but with science there's always the means for ascertaining whether those assertions actually correspond to reality, which is not necessarily always the case with philosophy, since it can deal with intangibles. One thing Wittgenstein hammers home in the Tractatus is that propositions are only valuable in regards to their truth functions. Which is why tautologies are meaningless, since they cannot by their very nature be false.

[@mehwhatever9726]

@@TH3F4LC0Nx Does he adress the issue of having no control of what a person desires or how much a choice is influenced by outside forces in regards to "free will"? The question of free will is a major contention to me, because it's quite easy to influence the decision-making process of most people by manipulating the evironment around them (instincts, biases, upbringing, propabanda). Just how much of person's will is objectively their own and not something that was intentionally or unintentionally forced into them. The way I see "free will" is the question of which influence is stronger in each specific situation, affected by all of the mental and outside factors combined. I think it is possible to predict any behavior if we had a way to calculate the exact influence of all these factors combined.

[@TH3F4LC0Nx]

@@mehwhatever9726 Yeah, he doesn't really go that deep into it. Basically just states that the future cannot be predicted with absolute certainty. The latter portions of the book are kind of like a cursory overview of traditional philosophical issues, but his commentary is restricted to only what he can say that is logically sound. He doesn't really go off into psychology too much.