Possible objects and possible states of affairs in Wittgenstein's tractatus
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In P. Frascolla (ed.), Tractatus logico-philosophicus: Sources, Themes, Perspectives. Università degli studi della Basilicata. 129-153 (2002)
In one of its latest papers Timothy Williamson has drawn a distinction between two readings of the phrase "possible F", where "F" is a predicate variable: the predicative and the attributive. In what follows, on the one hand I will hold that the first reading naturally applies to the phrase "possible object", thereby supporting a moderata conception of possibilia as entities that possibly exist. Moreover, I will maintain that one such conception provides the best possible account of Tractarian objects. On the other hand, I will claim that the second reading of the phrase "possible state of affairs" supports a parsimonious ontology of states of affairs, according to which a possible state of affairs is nothing over and above the de re possibility its constituents have of being related in a certain way to each other. As a result facts, i.e. possible states of affairs actually obtaining, are the only genuine states of affairs that there are, or, to put it differently, for any given state of affairs it is redundant that it is a fact. Besides, I will also claim that, appearances notwithstanding, this ontology of Sachverhalten underlies the Tractatus itself. Finally, I will try to show how, again appearances notwithstanding, this thrifty ontology of Sachverhalten squares with the semantic theses of the Tractatus according to which an elementary proposition presents a possible state of affairs as its sense and it is true if ‘that’ possible states of affairs obtains.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
D. M. Armstrong (1997). A World of States of Affairs. Cambridge University Press.
Hans Kraml (1998). States of Affairs. Erkenntnis 48 (2-3):311-324.
Holger Leerhoff (2008). Bradley's Regress, Russell's States of Affairs, and Some General Remarks on the Problem. Studia Philosophica Estonica 1 (2):249-264.
Robert F. Card (2004). Consequentialist Teleology and the Valuation of States of Affairs. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (3):253-265.
Stephen Read (2005). The Unity of the Fact. Philosophy 80 (3):317-342.
James D. Rissler (2006). Does Armstrong Need States of Affairs? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):193 – 209.
Hans Johann Glock (2006). Truth in the Tractatus. Synthese 148 (2):345 - 368.
Dale Jacquette (2010). Truth Breakers. Topoi 29 (2):153-163.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #213,890 of 1,101,814 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?