David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Investigations 23 (1):54–69 (2000)
I take issue with Pieranna Garavaso’s contention - lodged in a rapprochement between Wittgenstein and Quine - that for Wittgenstein, there is no sharp categorial distinction between logical and empirical propositions, but only one of degree. I argue that Garavaso’s conclusion results from a misunderstanding of the river-bed analogy in On Certainty (96-99). When Wittgenstein maintains there is not a sharp boundary between propositions of logic and empirical propositions, he does not imply that there is not a sharp categorial difference between them, but that the boundary is permeable. The consequent changeability of status of logical and empirical propositions does not entail the collapse, or even a partial blurring, of their respective categories. I then address Wittgenstein’s puzzlement, in On Certainty, about the logical status of some apparently empirical propositions, and show that he resolves this not, as is often thought, by concluding that some empirical propositions are necessary, but by recognizing the ‘empiricality’ of these propositions as merely apparent. A line is thereby drawn between empirical propositions and framework propositions that only have the form of empirical propositions (OC 401). I conclude that, unlike Quine, Wittgenstein held a foundational view of our system of beliefs, making a categorial distinction between the foundation-walls and the house, and regarding part of these foundations as immovable.
|Keywords||basic beliefs certainty Wittgenstein Quine|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael Scanlan (1995). Wittgenstein, Truth-Functions, and Generality. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:175-193.
Danièle Moyal-Sharrock (2004). Understanding Wittgenstein's on Certainty. Palgrave Macmillan.
Michael Hymers (2005). Going Around the Vienna Circle: Wittgenstein and Verification. Philosophical Investigations 28 (3):205–234.
Norman Malcolm (1988). Wittgenstein's Scepticism' in on Certainty. Inquiry 31 (3):277 – 293.
Pieranna Garavaso (1998). The Distinction Between the Logical and the Empirical in on Certainty. Philosophical Investigations 21 (3):251–267.
José L. Zalabardo (2010). The Tractatus on Logical Consequence. European Journal of Philosophy 18 (3):425-442.
Anthony Palmer (2011). Propositions, Properties and Relations: Wittgenstein's “Notes on Logic” and the Tractatus. Philosophical Investigations 34 (1):77-93.
Nigel Pleasants (2009). Wittgenstein and Basic Moral Certainty. Philosophia 37 (4):669-679.
Elly Vintiadis (2006). Why Certainty is Not a Mansion. Journal of Philosophical Research 31:143-152.
Daniele Moyal-Sharrock (2003). Logic in Action: Wittgenstein's Logical Pragmatism and the Impotence of Scepticism. Philosophical Investigations 26 (2):125-148.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #94,117 of 1,101,847 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #191,964 of 1,101,847 )
How can I increase my downloads?