Podcasts about Tractatus

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! paypal.me/LibroTobias Ludwig Wittgenstein (1989-1951) comenzó a escribir el Tractatus logico philosophicus hacia 1912, continuándolo durante el tiempo que estuvo en el frente, en la Primera Guerra Mundial, y dándole fin en agosto de 1918. El lenguaje y sus límites es la idea central del libro, que se desarrolla a través de un análisis de carácter lógico. Los resultados de este análisis del lenguaje se aplican no solo a la lógica, sino también a la matemática y a las ciencias naturales. De ahí que el tratado tenga la pretensión de repercutir hasta en tres dimensiones: la lógica, la epistemológica y también una quizá menos transitada, a saber, la ética, pues como es sabido las consecuencias de las ciencias naturales tienen siempre fuertes implicaciones de carácter ético y moral (pongamos por caso los grandes debates éticos que suscitó la teoría de la evolución de Darwin, que perduran hasta el presente). Canciones: • “Ludwig Wittgenstein on Ethics” de Endolith • “Roses and Teeth for Ludwig Wittgenstein” de Matmos Presentación, dirección, edición y montaje: Asier Menéndez Marín Diseño logo Podcast: albacanodesigns (Alba Cano) Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

TRADCAST EXPRESS - Episode 195 Topics covered: A refutation of Matt Gaspers' argument that Francis must be a valid Pope because he enjoys universal peaceful acceptance by the whole Church, which, according to Cardinal Louis Billot and others, is an infallible sign of a Pope's legitimacy. [This episode was originally meant to be published on Aug. 15, 2024, but due to technical difficulties did not get released until the following day.] Links: YouTube: "Live Stream with Matt Gaspers — Latest on Abp. Viganò" with Robert Moynihan and Matt Gaspers, Urbi et Orbi Communications/Inside the Vatican (Aug. 13, 2024) Matt Gaspers, "Archbishop Viganò and the Question of Pope Francis part II", One Peter Five (Aug. 14, 2024) Cardinal Louis Billot, "On the Legitimacy of the Roman Pontiff", in Tractatus de Ecclesia Christi (Rome, 1927), q. 14, th. 29 "St. Robert Bellarmine's Teaching on Resisting a Pope", Novus Ordo Watch (Apr. 11, 2018) The Catholic Teaching on the Papacy according to the Magisterium Sign up to be notified of new episode releases automatically at tradcast.org. Produced by NOVUSORDOWATCH.org Support us by making a tax-deductible contribution at NovusOrdoWatch.org/donate/

When Wittgenstein published his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus in 1921, he claimed to have solved all philosophical problems. One problem that hasn't been solved though is how best to translate this notoriously difficult work. The expiry of the book's copyright in 2021 has brought three new English translations in less than a year, each grappling with the difficulties posed by a philosopher who frequently undermined his own use of language to demonstrate the limitations of what can be represented. Adrian Moore joins Malin Hay to discuss what Wittgenstein hoped to achieve with the only work he published in his lifetime and to consider how much we should trust his assertion that everything it contains is nonsensical.Find further reading and listening on the episode page: https://lrb.me/tractatuspod Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Special Announcement #1 Attend the Legendary Summer Intensive Featuring Drs. David Burns and Jill Levitt August 8 - 11. 2024 Learn Advanced TEAM-CBT skills Heal yourself, heal your patients First Intensive in 5 years! It will knock your socks off! Limited Seating--Act Fast Click for registration / more information! Sadly, this workshop is a training program which will be limited to therapists and mental health professionals and graduate students in a mental health field  Apologies, but therapists have complained when non-therapists have attended our continuing education training programs. This is partly because of the intimate nature of the small group exercises and the personal work the therapists may do during the workshop. Certified coaches and counselors are welcome to attend. Special Announcement #2 Here's some GREAT news! The Feeling Great App is now available in both app stores (IOS and Android) and is for therapists and the general public, and you can take a ride for free! Check it Today's Podcast Practical Philosophy Month Part 1, The Free Will Problem Welcome to Practical Philosophy month. For the next five weeks, we will discuss some of the most popular and challenging problems in philosophy, such as these: Do human beings have free will? Or is free will just an illusion? Do human beings have a “self?” Or is the “self” just another illusion? Is it possible to be more or less “worthwhile?” Are some humans “better” or “worse” than others? Does God exist? Is the universe “real” or “one”? What's the meaning of life? What is “self-esteem”? How does it differ from self-confidence? What's the difference between conditional and unconditional self-esteem? What's the difference between self-esteem and self-acceptance? What do you have to do to experience joy and feelings of worthwhileness? We will try to complete the list in five weeks, so some weeks we may include more than one topic, since many of these topics are related to one another. Rhonda and David will be joined by our beloved Dr. Matt May, a regular on our Ask David episodes, and for the first and second sessions we will be joined by our beloved Dr. Fabrice Nye, who created and hosted the Feeling Good Podcasts several years ago. Each week, you will also hear about the linkage between these philosophical dilemmas, and emotional problems, like depression, anxiety, and relationship conflicts. For example, nearly all depressed individuals believe that they aren't sufficiently “worthwhile.” I see my goal as a psychiatrist not as helping people feel “more worthwhile,” but rather showing people, if interested, how to give up this notion entirely and become free of certain kinds of damaging judgments of the “self” and others. You will also learn how these types of philosophical problems continue to play a large role in psychiatry and psychology, including the DSM5 diagnostic system. For example, is the diagnosis of “Generalized Anxiety Disorder” a true “mental disorder” that you could “have” or “not have?” And might some or most of the so-called “mental disorders” listed in the DSM be based on faulty philosophical / logical thinking? And if many or most of the “mental disorders” are based on goofy, faulty thinking, is there a more productive and effective way to think about most emotional problems? And how did we get into this mess in the first place? Worrying certainly exists, and we all worry at times. But how much or how often do you have to worry before you develop or have a “mental disorder” called “Generalized Anxiety Disorder” that can be diagnosed like any medical illness and treated with drugs? Or is “Generalized Anxiety Disorder” (and hundreds of other “mental disorders in the DSM” based on a certain kind of nonsensical thinking? And if so, why? What is the goofy, faulty thinking in the DSM? And are there some “mental disorders” that are valid and real? We HAVE touched on all of these themes in previous podcasts, but I thought it would be nice to put them all in one place and bring in a variety of “solutions,” controversies, and experts. I David, will often represent (hopefully, and to the best of my ability) the thinking of Ludwig Wittgenstein, as expressed in his famous book, Philosophical Investigation, published in 1950 following his death. That book consists of a series of numbered brief essays (a few paragraphs each) that were based on notes found in a metal box under his dormitory room at Cambridge University. He'd written these in preparation for his weekly seminars in his dormitory room. Wittgenstein, although now widely regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of all time, did not think he knew enough to teach in a classroom. In fact, because of his feelings of depression and self-doubt, he sadly never tried to publish anything when he was alive. Wittgenstein's philosophy also played an indirect but significant role in the evolution of several modern psychotherapies. His philosophy created new ways of thinking that gave rise to the work of Dr. Albert Ellis, the famous New York psychologist who created Rational Emotive Therapy during the 1950s. Ellis emphasized that the “Should Statements” that trigger so much guilt, shame, depression, anxiety, and rage are based on illogical thinking. He might often say, “Where is it written that people or the world “should” be the way you want them to be?” Of course, this idea actually traces back to the Greek Stoic philosophers like Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. Wittgenstein's thinking also seems to have played a role in the thinking of Dr. Aaron Beck, who adapted the work of Ellis and called his version of the “Cognitive Therapy.” Beck emphasized many thinking errors, like All-or-Nothing Thinking, and Overgeneralization, that trigger depression, anxiety, and more. Sadly, Wittgenstein struggled with severe depression and loneliness throughout his life, and three of his four brothers tragically died by suicide. Wittgenstein also had prolonged periods of time when he considered suicide. It is also sad that he did not know how to apply his brilliant philosophical breakthroughs to his own negative thinking, but that application of his work did not develop at the time he was still alive. Part of Wittgenstein's depression was related, I believe, to the fact that very few people, including the most famous philosophers of Europe, could understand his thinking when he was alive. From time to time, I think he glimpsed the enormous importance of his work; but I believe that he also had prolonged moments of self-doubt when he thought his work was of little value at best. To be as correct as possible, Wittgenstein did write a manuscript called Tractatus Logico Philosophicus as a young man, although he never tried to publish it. He wrote it when he was a prisoner of war. He thought this book solved all the problems of philosophy, which had plagued him since he was a child, and he felt great relief. He sent a copy of his manuscript to Bertrand Russell, who was a famous British philosopher. Bertrand Russell was incredibly impressed with the Tractatus and distributed it to many European philosophers. Bertrand Russell thought it might be the greatest book in the history of philosophy, and a number of the 20th century philosophical movements including Logical Positivism, were inspired by that book. However, Wittgenstein left the field of philosophy, thinking that his work was done, and that he'd found the solutions he was looking for. He tried teaching grammar school for a while, but was fired because he became frustrated and violent toward some of his students. He also tried to survive as a fisher in a Norwegian fishing town, but was not successful at that, either, because he didn't know much about fishing, much less supporting yourself through fishing. One day, he learned that a brilliant Swedish economics student had found a flaw in his Tractatus, and his inner turmoil about the puzzling problems of philosophy flared up again. He decided to return to the study of philosophy. He applied to be an advanced undergraduate at Cambridge University, but when someone in the admissions office spotted his application, they recognized his name and showed his application to Bertrand Russell, who had been wondering what had become of the young man who once sent him such a brilliant manuscript. Russell, who was the chair of the department of philosophy, said to being Wittgenstein to his office immediately for an interview. Russell explained that he would have to reject Wittgenstein's application to be an undergraduate at Cambridge University. Deeply disappointed, Wittgenstein asked why. Russell told him it was because he was already recognized as the greatest philosopher of the 20th century. Bertrand proposed that if Wittgenstein would agree to skip college and graduate school, they would immediately award him a PhD for the manuscript he'd sent to Russell years earlier. Russell also offered him a full professor ship in the department of philosophy. Wittgenstein protested and said he needed to study philosophy again, because of the error in Tractatus, and that he didn't know anything, and definitely could not teach in a classroom. Bertrand Russell insisted, and they finally struck a deal where Wittgenstein would agree to be a professor of philosophy but all he would have to do was to have a conversation session with anybody who wanted to talk to him at his dormitory room once a week. Wittgenstein accepted and met for years with students and famous philosophers who came from around Europe to crowd into his dormitory room for his weekly seminars, and he began to shape a radically different philosophical approach from the one he'd described earlier in his Tractatus. He was determined to find a new way to solve all the problems of philosophy. And, to my way of thinking, along with those few who really understand him, he was successful. But he was often frustrated because, so few understood him. This was unfortunate, because what he was saying was incredibly simple and basic, and it was pretty similar to, if not identical to, the thinking of the Buddha 2500 years earlier. The Buddha apparently had the same problem—almost nobody could understand what he was trying to say when he was still alive. They couldn't “get it” when he was talking about the so-called “Great Death” of the “self,” or talking about the path to enlightenment. The Buddha's frustration resulted from the exact same problem Wittgenstein encountered 2500 years later. The Buddha was saying something that was extremely simple, obvious, and basic—and yet, it was rumored that of his more than 100,000 followers when he was alive, only three actually “got it” and experienced enlightenment. When I read Philosophical Investigations my senior year in college, it was rumored that only seven people in the world understood what Wittgenstein was trying to say. Wittgenstein's dream was that philosophy students would “get” his thinking and give up philosophy when they realized that most if not all philosophical problems are sheer nonsense. He wanted them to do something practical and real in the world instead of studying philosophy. He was verry disappointed when his favorite student, Norman Malcolm (one of the seven who “got it,”) pursued an illustrious career teaching philosophy in America at Cornell University. I always wished I could have known Wittgenstein when he was alive, so I could have told him this: I loved you, too, and I got it after several months of confusion, trying to understand your Philosophical Investigations, but eventually understood it with the help of your student, Norman Malcolm. His book about you was very inspiring. And that's why I left philosophy for something more practical in the world. I decided at the last minute to go to medical school to become a psychiatrist instead of philosophy graduate school. Hopefully, I am doing something that you might be proud of! But oddly enough, your thinking has also influenced my approach to people who feel depressed and worthless. They are also under a kind of destructive “enchantment,” thinking that there is some such “thing” as a more or less worthwhile human being! And this is a major cause of depression and anxiety and feelings of worthlessness and hopelessness. I wonder if you, Wittgenstein, ever felt that you weren't “good enough” when you were feeling down. hopeless and suicidal? I sure wish I could have helped you with that! If you want to understand Wittgenstein's work, the best book in my opinion is Norman Malcolm's moving and affectionate tribute to his beloved teacher, entitled “Ludwig Wittgenstein: A Memoir.” It's a short moving tribute to his beloved teacher, and tears go down my cheeks every time I read it, or even think about it. If you ever visit my office here at home, you'll find that memoir proudly sitting on my bookshelf, with a handsome photo of Wittgenstein on the cover. Toward the end of his life, Wittgenstein appears to have become more or less homeless, and he died from prostate cancer. His doctor said he could live in his home, where he was befriended by the doctor's wife in his final days. His dying words were, “Tell them that I had a wonderful life.” He died on April 29, 1951, just a few hours before my wife was born in Palo Alto, California. Surprisingly, she is the only person I've ever met who understood Wittgenstein's thinking entirely the first time I explained it to her. She “already knew” what Wittgenstein, the greatest philosophical genius of the 20th century, spent a lifetime figuring out! Reincarnation is pretty “out there,” and fairly silly, to my way of thinking, but sometimes it can be fun to think about it! Here is my understanding of how the thinking of the “later Wittgenstein” actually developed. His first book, which is nearly impossible to understand, was called the Tractatus Logico Philosophicus. It is a series of numbered propositions, which he compared to climbing up a ladder, rung by rung, as you read the book until you got to the roof at the top of the ladder. Then you could throw your ladder away and give up philosophical thinking, since he thought his book contained the solution to all the problems of philosophy that had tormented him since childhood, as mentioned previously. The philosophy of language in the Tractatus is based on the thinking of Aristotle and Plato, who thought that the function of language was to name things that exist in the real world. Plato's idea was that our real world consists of imperfect examples of a “Platonic Reality” which consisted of “perfect” representations of everything. So, for example, Plato believed there could be a perfect “table,” a perfect “lamp,” and so forth. In other words, he thought there was an ideal essence to the concept of a “table.” And, I suppose, there might also be a “perfect” version of you! The early Wittgenstein also thought that the logic inherent in our sentences reflected the logic inherent in an external reality. If that doesn't make much sense to you, join the club! But that's kind of what Plato and Aristotle were promoting, at least in my (David's) understanding. When Wittgenstein's Tractatus was debunked, he was devastated, and desperately wanted to find another way to solve the problems of philosophy, since they started tormenting him again. It was much like a relapse of OCD or some other emotional problem. In fact, he thought of philosophy as a kind of mental illness that needed treatment. Here's an example of the types of philosophical problems that tormented him. Do human beings have free will? Do we have a “self?” Is the universal “real?” Of course, we THINK we have free will, and it SEEMS like we make “free decisions” all day long, but is this just an illusion? For example, some people would argue that we cannot have “free will” because we “have to” follow the laws of science that govern everything, including how the brain works. So, since we “have to” do what we are doing at every moment of every day, we must not have free will! Here is an argument that we do NOT have “free will.” When a powerful storm or hurricane destroys a portion of a city, and people die, we see this as a tragedy, but we don't get angry at the hurricane because it does have “free will.” It is just obeying the laws of physics that govern the forces of wind, air pressure, heat and cooling, and so forth. A storm cannot behave in any other way. So, the argument goes, we are also following the laws that govern the functioning of our bodies and brains, and so we cannot do other than what we do, so we, too, have no “free will.” We THINK we are acting freely but it is an illusion, so our brains are obeying the laws of the universe at every moment! For hundreds of years philosophers have struggled with this puzzle, and many people still wrestle with this problem today. It was one of the problems that drew me to philosophy. Impractical for sure, but still tantalizing. Another way to express the free will puzzle is via religious thinking. I was taught when I was growing up that God is omnipotent (all powerful), omnipresent (present everywhere) and omniscient (all knowing.) So, God knows the past, present, and future. And if God knows the future, then God knows what we will do at every moment of every day, and we are helpless to do otherwise. Therefore, we have no “free will,” even though we “think” we do! This free will problem can definitely be unsettling, with troubling moral consequences. If we do not “free will,” then are serial killers really responsible for, or guilty, or accountable for their actions? If we do not have free will, then wouldn't that give us license to do whatever we want whenever we want? Clever arguments for sure! We may “feel” like we have the freedom to do whatever we want at almost any moment of any day, but are we fooling ourselves and living in some gigantic hoax, or illusion? Are we total slaves with the delusion that we are actually acting “freely?” How do we resolve this problem? Well, one day Wittgenstein was walking past a soccer game at the park, and the soccer ball hit him on the head. He wasn't hurt, but had the thought, “What if the function of language is NOT to name things (like trees, or lamps, etc.) that exist in some “external reality,” like Plato and Aristotle thought? What if language actually functions as a series of “language games,” with rules, just like the game of soccer? Then the meaning of any words would simply be the many ways the word is used in different real world situations. In fact, that's what you find in the dictionary when you look up the meaning of a word. The dictionary doesn't ever give you some “correct” or ”pure” meaning, since most words have many meanings. This would be the opposite of the philosophy of Aristotle and Plato who argued that there were “true” meanings for every word, noun, or concept. What if, instead, words had NO true or essential meanings, and their meanings were simply embedded in the context in which they are used in ordinary, everyday language? If so, this might mean that philosophical problems emerge when we try to pull words out of their ordinary meanings, which are always obvious, and put them into some metaphysical realm where philosophers argue about “ultimate truth.” Let's say we wanted to find out if humans have “free will.” Well, not being sure if there is such a “thing” as “free will,” we could look up “free” and “will” in the dictionary. (I know this sounds incredibly obvious and almost ridiculous.) What does “free” mean? Well, we could talk about the many ways we use “free.” Political freedom means that in some countries you cannot contradict the leader (the dictator) without the danger of being thrown in prison or even murdered. But in other countries, you are, In fact, free to express your own ideas and opinions, without fear of punishment. Free also means getting something without having to pay for it, like a seventh bottle of soda is free at the local grocery store if you purchase a six pack. Free can also mean “available.” I am starting up my Sunday hikes again, and I might say, “If you are free this Sunday morning, meet at my front door at 9 and we'll go for a hike and have a dim sum feast afterwards at a Chinese restaurant on Castro Street in Mountain View, California, Now notice that when you talk about “free will” you have taken this word, “free,” out of the familiar contexts in which we find it, and given it some type of metaphysical “meaning.” But in this metaphysical, philosophical arena, it has no meaning. So, instead of trying to “solve” the so-called “free will” problem, we can dismiss it as nonsensical, and ignore it as having no practical meaning, and move on with our lives. We can say, “I just don't understand that problem! I don't know what you're talking about when you ask the general question of whether we have something called ‘free will.'” That either works for you, or it doesn't work for you! Your choice. It does work for me, but it took me months of thinking until I suddenly “got it.” My way of describing this philosophical error is “nounism.” You think that nouns always refer to things that could “exist” or “not-exist,” just like Plato and Aristotle thought. So, you ponder and try to figure out if this notion of “free will” exists or does not exist. But it's arguably a meaningless question. That's why I say, and Wittgenstein might say, I have no idea what you're talking about. Today we'll discuss the free will problem and how it might relate to our field of psychotherapy. Next week, we'll deal with another thorny problem: Do we have a “self?” Or is that also just some kind of illusion? I (David) wrote these show notes before the show, and we have had fairly extensive email exchanges, with a variety of points of view on whether or not we have something we can call “free will.” First, I'll put a great email by Matt, followed by a comment by Fabrice. Here's Matt's email first: Subject: Re: question Yes, that's getting very close to what I'm trying to communicate. I don't believe you are 'slow' or 'super lame', either. In fact, quite the opposite. I suspect I'm failing to do an adequate job of disarming your claims that 'free will' and 'self' are words taken out-of-context and, therefore, can't be shown to exist or not-exist. I apologize, as I am pretty excited about the potential to help people, suffering with self-blame and other-blame, by realizing that we and others don't have a 'self' or 'free will'. I believe we have a brain that makes decisions and creates experiences, including the experience of having a 'self' and 'free will'. I believe that the experience of 'making' a decision is an illusion, as is the idea of a static, unchanging 'self' that controls decision-making. I asked you to pick a movie and you said, 'Green Mile'. You acknowledged that this movie title simply 'popped into my head'. That's correct. Your 'self' didn't control what you selected, using 'free will'. Your brain just came up with that movie title. There was no 'self' that made a decision to choose that word. I agree that we have a brain which is incredibly powerful. I'm claiming that we don't have an auxiliary 'self', with extra super powers, controlling our brain. We can make decisions, but we don't have 'free will', meaning, the ability to control those decisions. I do think you have some resistance to seeing through the illusions of 'self' and 'free will', all of which say awesome things about you, e.g. morality and justice. I'm not trying to convince you, one way or another, and I don't expect to. I'm more interested in the listening audience, as many people are significantly relieved when they realize that we are more the victims of our biology and circumstance rather than defective 'selves' lacking 'willpower'. To put a slightly finer point on the subject, when people say they have 'free will', they don't mean that 'decisions are made'. Obviously, decisions are made. You decided to keep reading this email, for example. Or you didn't. I'm not sure. Either way, a decision was made. When people say they have 'free will', they are saying that they (really, their 'self') are/is free to decide whether to continue reading this email, and that this power goes above and beyond what their brain is doing, according to the laws of physics. I am claiming that this is a ridiculous and dangerous thought, for which there is no evidence. You're saying these terms haven't been defined. I'm pointing out that they already have been, intuitively, by anyone who thinks, 'I shouldn't have done that', or 'they shouldn't have done that'. These thoughts require a belief that they 'could have' done something different, that they had free will. Aside from rage and guilt, let's examine the narcissism and excessive sense of confidence a patient might have, if they believe that they can simply 'decide', through sheer 'willpower', not to beat up on themselves anymore. Or a patient who believes they can simply 'decide' to always use the 5-Secrets, rather than criticize and blame. Can they? I've never seen that happen. That's why I assign homework. I know that the goal is to rewire the brain so they can feel and perform better, later. We can't simply decide to feel good all the time. We all drift in-and-out of enlightenment. If we want to increase the likelihood that we will be able to set aside self-criticism or communicate more effectively, we have to practice new thoughts and behaviors. If we do, we will develop greater skills at defeating negative thoughts and communicating effectively. Otherwise, our brains will do, in the future, what they are programmed to do, now. It's because we lack 'free will', that we must do homework. Similarly, you couldn't simply 'decide' to be the world's best ping-pong player. You realized you would have to work hard to re-wire your brain, if you wanted to have a chance at that. Let's use the murderer/cat example: A cat tortures and kills mice for the same reasons that a murderer does: their brains are programmed to do so. Murderers don't have a defective 'self' that is failing to express 'free will' adequately, when they murder. They're doing precisely what the atomic structure of their brain caused them to do, according to the laws of physics, in that moment, when presented with those precise stimuli. We don't have to judge or punish the cat or the murderer's 'self' and insist they should have used their 'free will'. We can accept that neither creature had the ability to decide differently from what their brain decided, in that moment. That is where the therapeutic element of this realization comes into play. I think it's important on a lot of levels, to stop blaming cats for being cats and murderers for being murderers. Similarly, if a patient doesn't want to do homework, will it do any good to blame them and think they're bad and should decide differently? No, it helps to accept them where they are, and to accept ourselves where we are, with open hands. Realizing nobody has a 'self' operating their brain and making decisions that are better than their brains' decisions doesn't mean we have to let all the murderers go or trust our cat with a new mouse companion. We can still be aware that their brains are programmed to murder. We would still be motivated to do whatever is necessary to protect society and mice. The difference is the attitude towards the murderer. We aren't trying to 'punish' or 'get vengeance' but to protect and, instead of 'labeling' them as having a 'bad self' or even being a 'murderer', but someone who has murdered and, left to their own devices, likely to do so again.  Instead of judging and demanding vengeance, we would see a murderer as the victim of their biology and environment. Instead of condemning them as permanently evil and bad, we could recognize that their brain is currently wired to do bad things and they might still learn new ways to interact with others. Perhaps they're not hopeless cases, after all. From the other side, if I ever committed murder, and sentenced to death, I wouldn't want to be feeling defective, thinking what a bad self I have and guilty/ashamed for not flexing my 'free will' in the heat of the moment. Instead, I might feel a sense of relief, purpose and meaning, that I was protecting others by being put to death. Alright, enough out of me! Thanks, Matt And now, the response from Fabrice: Matt's thinking is exactly in line with mine. I don't know if the topic came up in your discussion, but some people argue that actually someone could have done something differently than they did, because there is some randomness in Nature. But that argument doesn't hold water because even if the decision “made” by their brain is different, it has nothing to do with their will but only with the Heisenberg principle. Cheers! Fabrice Nye fabrice@life.net David's wrap up comment. Matt and Fabrice have quite a different view of “free will” and the “self.” They are arguing, very thoughtfully and persuasive, that we do not “have” a “self” or “free will.” People have been involved in this debate, as I've mentioned, for hundreds of years, taking one side or another. My own thinking is different, and reflects my understanding of Wittgenstein's thinking. They have take these words out of the contexts in which they exist in everyday language, (which is a huge temptation) and involved in a debate about abstract concepts which have no meaning. Very few people, it seems, were able to grasp this idea when Wittgenstein was alive, or even today. So, if what I'm saying makes no sense to you, be comforted, since it seems likely that 99% of the people reading this, or listening to the show, will agree with you! And that's still a puzzle to me. It is not clear to me why so many people still cannot “see” or “get” this idea that words do not have any pure or essential “meaning” outside of the context of everyday use of language. The best psychotherapy example I can use is the fact that nearly all depressed individuals are trying to figure out, on some abstract or philosophical level, whether they are “worthwhile” or “good enough,” or whatever. This seems to be a “real” problem, and so they believe that they are not sufficiently worthwhile. This belief can be so convincing that many people commit suicide, out of a sense of hopelessness and self-hatred. But there is not such thing as a human being who is more or less “worthwhile.” Of course, your actions can be more or less worthwhile at any moment, and we can evaluate or judge our specific behaviors. Yesterday, we had our first recording session in a video studio we have set up for our Feeling Great App. We had a lot of fun and recorded some (hopefully) interesting stories we'll publish on our two new YouTube channels. I really appreciated the colleagues who made this possible. It was a relief for me because I tend to have performance anxiety, which impairs my ability to speak naturally and with emotion. But this time, there was no anxiety at all, so it was fun. Did this make me or my colleagues more worthwhile human beings? No! But it did show that we'd become a bit more effective and communicating messages that will trigger healing and understanding in our fans, and hope that includes you! When you “see” this, perhaps for the first time, it can be incredibly liberating, since you no longer have the need to have a “self” that's “special” or worthwhile. And, as some of you know, my beloved teacher and cat, Obie, taught me that when you no longer need to be “special,” life becomes special. When your “self” dies, you inherit the world! There's no funeral, only a celebration! Feel free to contact us with your thoughts, ideas and questions! Thank you for listening today! Rhonda, Matt, Fabrice, and David

Muchas personas rechazan o no entienden el arte conceptual porque desconocen su origen o las referencias que toma. El filósofo Ludwig Wittgenstein es con toda seguridad una pieza clave para la comprensión de este bloque artístico. Sin embargo, la explotación abusiva de su Tractatus y la reiteración de piezas de carácter pretencioso terminaron por convertir a este tipo de corrientes artísticas en torres de marfil aisladas. En la actualidad, Wittgenstein sigue siendo sobado como la barriga de un buda. En mi opinión se trata de un filósofo sobrevalorado pero cuyo fenómeno ha producido obras de arte y literarias extremadamente interesantes.

 (Durée 02 : 33 : 58) Télécharger l'Audio du Live  AVERTISSEMENT : Tous les premiers mardi du mois, à 21h, vous pouvez aussi nous retrouver en live sur ma chaîne Twitch. Pour les nombreuses personnes qui n'ont pas de compte Twitch et qui souhaitent seulement écouter ces émissions en podcast, je propose de rediffuser chacune d'entre elles, ici même, sur La Cellule. Puisqu'il s'agit de l'audio d'un live, vous n'aurez hélas pas accès aux visuels proposés le jour J. Au cas où vous auriez besoin du visuel, sachez que ces émissions sont également rediffusées sur ma chaîne YouTube. *** Après quelques petites publicités (pour Proxy et Marchebranche), nous poursuivons notre analyse du Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus de Ludwig Wittgenstein. Regarder sur YouTube  Ce mois-ci, ce sont les états de choses et les objets du traité qui motivent notre discussion. Grâce à la nouvelle traduction de Christiane Chauviré et de Sabine Plaud, certaines choses s'éclairent et, à travers la notion d'espace logique, les liens entre le Tractatus et le jeu de rôle commencent enfin à émerger... Bonne écoute !

Digerdöden anlände år 1347 till Svarta havsområdet – en fruktansvärd pandemi. På kort tid spred den sig med italienska handelsfartyg till Konstantinopel, Alexandria, Messina och Genua, för att därefter lamslå hela Europa och Främre Orienten.Minst en tredjedel, troligen mer, av befolkningen dog, och under de decennier som följde upprepades tragedin flera gånger. I många länder sjönk folkmängden med omkring två tredjedelar.”Digerdöden”, det vill säga ”stora döden”, skakade om samhället i grunden. Allt förändrades till följd av den höga mortaliteten. Jordbruksproduktionen störtdök, hantverkarlönerna sköt i höjden, skatteunderlaget mer än halverades, lågadelns medlemmar blev så fattiga att de drevs in i de korrupta ämbetsmännens eller de råbarkade legosoldaternas led och sjöröveriet fick en guldålder.En av de frågor som de överlevande ställde sig var VARFÖR. Hur kunde detta ske? Var digerdöden Guds straff för människornas synder, och i så fall vilka synder? Eller var epidemin ett verk av ondsinta människor som gick Satans ärenden? Hade judarna förgiftat brunnarna? Och hur kunde eländet motarbetas? Genom fromma botgörarmarscher och asketiskt självplågeri? Genom folkmagi? Eller genom att man lyssnade till medicinska auktoriteter och ålade sig strikta dieter? Förslagen var lika många som antalet självutnämnda experter.I detta avsnitt av podden Harrisons dramatiska historia samtalar Dick Harrison, professor i historia vid Lunds universitet, och fackboksförfattaren Katarina Harrison Lindbergh om digerdöden, den värsta katastrof som har drabbat Europa.Bild: Miniatyr av Pierart dou Tielt som illustrerar Tractatus quartus bu Gilles li Muisit (Tournai, ca 1353). Invånarna i Tournai begraver offer för digerdöden. Wikipeida, Public DomainKlippare: Emanuel LehtonenProducent: Urban Lindstedt Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

 (Durée 02 : 21 : 39) Télécharger l'Audio du Live  AVERTISSEMENT : Tous les premiers mardi du mois, à 21h, vous pouvez aussi nous retrouver en live sur ma chaîne Twitch. Pour les nombreuses personnes qui n'ont pas de compte Twitch et qui souhaitent seulement écouter ces émissions en podcast, je propose de rediffuser chacune d'entre elles, ici même, sur La Cellule. Puisqu'il s'agit de l'audio d'un live, vous n'aurez hélas pas accès aux visuels proposés le jour J. Au cas où vous auriez besoin du visuel, sachez que ces émissions sont également rediffusées sur ma chaîne YouTube.  *** "2.06 - La subsistance des états de choses et leur non-subsistance est la réalité." Est-ce à dire que le monde et le réel se confondent dans le Tractatus de Wittgenstein ? Qu'est-ce que la réalité pour le Premier Wittgenstein et quels liens la réalité et le langage entretiennent-ils ? Le langage est-il un voile pour le réel ? ou bien un outil nous permettant de l'atteindre ?Regarder sur YouTube  Ce mois-ci, je reçois Pierre Lagrange pour qui cette idée, l'idée que le langage chercherait à atteindre le réel, pose problème. La méthodologie de l'anthropologue et du vidéaste repose sur l'étude d'un terrain qui suppose que le langage fasse partie intégrante du réel. Pour lui, le langage ne porte pas sur quelque chose d'obscure, comme une "réalité" qui échapperait aux locuteurs. Non. Le langage est une part de cette réalité ! A travers ma lecture du Tractatus, j'essaie de faire discuter Pierre Lagrange et le Premier Wittgenstein, convaincu que l'un et l'autre ont beaucoup à apprendre l'un de l'autre...  Bonne écoute !

"Gozo" de Azahara Alonso  (Siruela) ha sido elegida por el gremio de libreros como mejor libro de no ficción del año y este viernes 3 de mayo ha entrado con todos los honores en la Biblioteca de Antonio Martínez Asensio de Hoy por Hoy. Ya estaba en nuestras estanterías, de hecho fue el primer libro que archivó  nuestro bibliotecario  el pasado septiembre. "Gozo" es un ensayo incalificable a mitad de camino entre la crónica y  el diario. Cuenta en primera persona la historia de una joven que decide irse con su pareja a la isla de Gozo (Malta) para busca un sentido a la vida y para decidir que hacer con ella. En ese año de aislamiento reflexiona sobre el trabajo,  el tiempo libre, la pereza y la culpa por no hacer nada, el turismo o  la obsesión por fotografiarlo todo. Es un libro que nos pone ante el espejo de un mundo en el que hemos vendido todo nuestro tiempo. Además de la visita a la Biblioteca de Azahara Alonso, Antonio Martínez Asensio como homenaje al 1  y al 2 de mayo nos ha traído tres libros: "Diario de peón"  de Thierry Metz (Periférica), Emilio Zola "Germinal" (Alianza) y "El 19 de marzo y el 2 de mayo" de Benito Pérez Galdós (Alianza). Azahara Alonso nos donó tres libros: "Matar a Platón" de Chantal Maillard (Tusquets), "La invención de Morel" de Adolfo Bioy Casares (Alfaguara) y  "Tractatus" de Ludwig Wittgenstein ( Cátedra) . El empleado Pepe Rubio nos trajo novedades: "La estrella más hermosa" de Yukio Mishina (Alianza) y "La ciudad y sus muros inciertos"  de Haruki Murakami (Tusquets). El libro perdido rescatado por Pascual Donate "La fuente de la fama:un paseo por el Madrid del Barrio de las Letras" de José María Goicoechea y Antonio Tiedra (Cordelia) . También entró entró en nuestros anaqueles un ejemplas de "Un libro una hora", en este caso "El principito" de Antoine de Saint-Exupery. Y los último en donar a nuestra biblioteca, los que llamaron primero, los oyentes que dejaron en las estanterías "La madre" de Máximo Gorki (Cátedra) , "Decidme cómo es un árbol" de Marcos Ana (Umbriel) y "el tiempo que nos une" de Alejandro Palomas (Matriarca)  

 (Durée 00 : 45 : 27) Télécharger l'Audio du Live  AVERTISSEMENT : Tous les premiers mardi du mois, à 21h, vous pouvez aussi nous retrouver en live sur ma chaîne Twitch. Pour les nombreuses personnes qui n'ont pas de compte Twitch et qui souhaitent seulement écouter ces émissions en podcast, je propose de rediffuser chacune d'entre elles, ici même, sur La Cellule. Puisqu'il s'agit de l'audio d'un live, vous n'aurez hélas pas accès aux visuels proposés le jour J. Au cas où vous auriez besoin du visuel, sachez que ces émissions sont également rediffusées sur ma chaîne YouTube. J'ai une nouvelle fois fait le choix de découper cet audio en deux parties. Vous vous trouvez ici dans la première partie du live, les news de ce mois-ci.  Si vous appréciez ces émissions et ces rediffusions, n'hésitez pas à les partagez, à vous abonner à la chaîne, à souscrire à mon Patreon et/ou à soutenir mes invitées en achetant leurs livres, leurs jeux, leurs œuvres. Bonne écoute ! *** Grâce à l'augmentation du prix de mes jeux, j'ai enfin pu reconstituer un trésor de guerre permettant le re-matérialisation de mes pdf, mais il reste fort à faire pour éditer Ex-Nihilo et "le projet secret" #SoEoNS que je vous dévoilerai bientôt. Par ailleurs, devant le succès de ce rendez-vous mensuel, je vous annonce que des soirées spéciales auront lieu, dont l'une le 25 Juin prochain, pour parler des mathématiques cachées dans "le Village" (mon dernier jeu à la croisée des chemins entre le solitaire et le démineur). Ces rendez-vous supplémentaires nous permettront d'aborder d'autres points, d'autres jeux, tout en conservant les lectures mensuelles du Tractatus de Wittgenstein. Nous parlerons aussi de la convention, ce week-end (le samedi 6 Avril), de l'Alliance des Seigneurs d'Aleth, l'association de jeu de rôle de Saint-Malo. Regarder sur YouTube  Mais l'actu chaude de l'indépendance, pour les habitué(e)s de La Cellule, c'est aussi et surtout le lancement de la précommande de Marchebranche, le jeu de rôle de Thomas Munier, aux Editions Dystopia. Je vous en parle longuement.  Bonne écoute !

 (Durée 01 : 34 : 47) Télécharger l'Audio du Live  AVERTISSEMENT : Tous les premiers mardi du mois, à 21h, vous pouvez aussi nous retrouver en live sur ma chaîne Twitch. Pour les nombreuses personnes qui n'ont pas de compte Twitch et qui souhaitent seulement écouter ces émissions en podcast, je propose de rediffuser chacune d'entre elles, ici même, sur La Cellule. Puisqu'il s'agit de l'audio d'un live, vous n'aurez hélas pas accès aux visuels proposés le jour J. Au cas où vous auriez besoin du visuel, sachez que ces émissions sont également rediffusées sur ma chaîne YouTube. J'ai une nouvelle fois fait le choix de découper cet audio en deux parties. Vous vous trouvez ici dans la deuxième partie du live, celle consacré à ma lecture du Tractatus de Wittgenstein.  *** "Le Monde est la totalité des faits, non des choses." Voici une proposition en apparence bien anodine et ô combien fertile pour la philosophie du jeune Wittgenstein. Car jusqu'ici nombre de philosophes avaient pensé le monde comme une somme d'objets simples, une somme d'idées, de données sensibles, de substances ou d'atomes, etc.Regarder sur YouTube  Ce mois-ci, je poursuis ma lecture du Tractatus avec vous. Nous analysons la première proposition du traité, tous ses éclaircissements et une partie de ses immenses conséquences. Le Tractatus est-il un traité de Métaphysique ? Tente-t-il de décrire la réalité ? Ou n'est-il qu'une tentative pour décrire comment fonctionne notre langage ? Faut-il faire une distinction entre "le fait" et "l'événement" ? Qu'est ce que l'espace logique ? Nous verrons comment le Tractatus peut aussi servir aux études sur le jeu de rôle...  Bonne écoute !

 (Durée 01 : 10 : 37) Télécharger l'Audio du Live  AVERTISSEMENT : Tous les premiers mardi du mois, à 21h, vous pouvez aussi nous retrouver en live sur ma chaîne Twitch. Pour les nombreuses personnes qui n'ont pas de compte Twitch et qui souhaitent seulement écouter ces émissions en podcast, je propose de rediffuser chacune d'entre elles, ici même, sur La Cellule. Puisqu'il s'agit de l'audio d'un live, vous n'aurez hélas pas accès aux visuels proposés le jour J. Au cas où vous auriez besoin du visuel, sachez que ces émissions sont également rediffusées sur ma chaîne YouTube. Ce mois-ci, le live était dense. J'ai donc fait le choix de découper cet audio en deux parties. Vous vous trouvez ici dans la deuxième partie du live, celle concernant ma lecture du Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus de Ludwig Wittgenstein.  Si vous appréciez ces émissions et ces rediffusions, n'hésitez pas à les partagez, à vous abonner à la chaîne, à souscrire à mon Patreon et/ou à soutenir mes invitées en achetant leurs livres, leurs jeux, leurs œuvres. Bonne écoute ! *** Dans un second temps de ce live, je tiens la promesse faite le mois dernier. Je vous avais promis de commencer avec vous un commentaire au long-cours du Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus de Ludwig Wittgenstein. Ensemble, lorsque nous ne parlerons pas de jeu de rôle ou de jeu de société, au cours de ces live, nous lirons lentement mais surement l'intégralité du Tractatus, pour en faire le commentaire le plus clair et le plus détaillé possible. Ce commentaire vous permettra aussi d'entrer dans l'univers de Sens et dans nombre de mes projets.   Regarder sur YouTube Cette semaine, nous lisons "l'avant propos" du Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus et nous en concluons que l'ambition de Wittgenstein avec ce livre est, ni plus ni moins, de résoudre toutes les questions philosphiques. Ça promet ! Bonne écoute !

"Oorzaak en Gevolg zijn synchroon en ze zijn slechts verschillende woorden voor dezelfde essentie" Op deze manier zette de Schotse filosoof Mary Shepherd het denken over causaliteit op zijn kop. Welke eigen positie neemt Shepherd in binnen het Britse empirisme dat nadenkt over de verhouding van de geest tot de externe wereld? Welke parallellen zijn er te trekken tussen haar denken en het denken van Kant, ondanks dat ze slechts een brak essay over hem had gelezen?En waarom is Shepherd in de vergetelheid geraakt, terwijl ze zo relevant is voor het hedendaagse denken over causaliteit? Te gast is Victor GijsbersDe denker die centraal staat: ShepherdMeer van Victor? Kijk op zijn eigen YouTube-kanaal: https://www.youtube.com/@VictorGijsbersEn lees ook zijn vertaling van het Tractatus van Wittgenstein: https://www.boomfilosofie.nl/product/100-10270_Tractatus

Quand Wittgenstein publie, en 1921, le "Tractatus logico-philosophicus", il affirme avoir résolu tous les problèmes philosophiques. De fait, beaucoup pensent qu'avec ce texte de quelques dizaines de pages, la grande aventure qui avait commencé en Grèce, 25 siècles plus tôt, se termine. Dans cet épisode, nous allons comprendre pourquoi.➔ Regardez la version vidéo de cet épisode :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ioq5Iecdw0A➔ Rejoignez-moi sur Patreon :https://www.patreon.com/Paroledephilosophe_____________Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Die österreichische Philosophin Isolde Charim wurde 2023 mit dem Essay-Preis "Tractatus" des Philosophicums Lech ausgezeichnet. In "Die Qualen des Narzissmus" entlarvt sie unter anderem die Mechanismen der freiwilligen Unterwerfung in der Gesellschaft . Die Verleihung erfolgte am 22. September 2023 im Rahmen des Philosophicums Lech. Anja Stegmaier hat für uns mit Isolde Charim gesprochen.

Pasquale Frascolla"Ricerche Filosofiche"Festival Filosofiahttps://festivalfilosofia.itFestival Filosofia, CarpiVenerdì 15 settembre, ore 10:00La lezione dei classici.Pasquale Frascolla"Richerche filosofiche"Ludwig Wittgenstein“Il significato di una parola è il suo uso nel linguaggio”: quale indagine sulle regole d'uso del linguaggio emerge dalle Ricerche filosofiche di Ludwig Wittgenstein?Pasquale Frascolla è professore di Filosofia e Teoria dei Linguaggi presso l'Università degli Studi di Napoli “Federico II”. Ha insegnato presso la Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa e l'Università degli Studi della Basilicata. È membro del Comitato Scientifico di diverse riviste e dell'Editorial Board dell'“International Journal of Philosophy”. Si è occupato della storia della filosofia analitica e in particolare della filosofia di Ludwig Wittgenstein, in merito alle regole e al linguaggio privato, indagando anche le teorie della logica, dell'argomentazione e le modalità di ragionamento deduttivo e induttivo. Ha pubblicato libri in lingua inglese e su numerose riviste internazionali. Tra le sue pubblicazioni: Introduzione alla logica. Dalla teoria dell'argomentazione alla logica formale (Bologna 2014); ha curato il Tractatus logico-philosophicus di Wittgenstein (con Luigi Perissinotto, Milano 2022).Tractatus logico-philosophicus di Ludwig WittgensteinCuratori: Luigi Perissinotto, Pasquale FrascollaFeltrinelli Editorehttps://feltrinellieditore.it"La filosofia non è una dottrina", sostiene Ludwig Wittgenstein, "ma un'attività". Nel Tractatus logico-philosophicus, unico suo libro filosofico pubblicato in vita, egli individua come scopo di quell'attività la chiarificazione logica dei pensieri e si propone di mostrare l'insensatezza dei problemi della filosofia tradizionale attraverso l'analisi logico-semantica del linguaggio. Partendo dai principi del simbolismo, formulati nella sua cosiddetta "teoria raffigurativa", giunge all'identificazione del significato di una proposizione con le sue condizioni di verità e inaugura, così, quello che è stato il paradigma dominante nello studio della semantica del linguaggio naturale per tutto il corso del Novecento e oltre. Da questo nucleo discendono la spiegazione della natura della verità logica, dell'inferenza e della probabilità. Uno degli aspetti più caratteristici dell'opera risiede nel fatto che, in base ai principi logico-semantici che fissano i limiti di ciò che si può dire sensatamente, finiscono per cadere oltre quei limiti non solo il discorso metafisico, ma anche quello etico, estetico e religioso. Questa è la sfera di cui, secondo Wittgenstein, "non si può parlare" e su cui "si deve tacere". A partire dal Circolo di Vienna, le concezioni del Tractatus ebbero un impatto che andò ben oltre l'ambito specifico della filosofia del linguaggio e della logica e che arrivò a determinare in larga parte i successivi sviluppi del pensiero novecentesco.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.itQuesto show fa parte del network Spreaker Prime. Se sei interessato a fare pubblicità in questo podcast, contattaci su https://www.spreaker.com/show/1487855/advertisement

Luigi Perissinotto"Festival Filosofia"Giochi LinguisticiUso, significato e forme di vitahttps://festivalfilosofia.itVenerdì 15 settembre 2023, ore 16:30, SassuoloLuigi Perissinotto "Giochi linguistici"Adottando l'idea di gioco linguistico, quale correlazione si dimostra esistere tra esperienze linguistiche e forme di vita, uso e adattamento alle regole? "Introduzione a Wittgenstein"Il Mulino, 2018https://mulino.itIl libro offre un accurato profilo complessivo di Ludwig Wittgenstein. Dopo averne illustrato le concezioni filosofiche in riferimento sia agli orientamenti culturali e filosofici del suo tempo che all'attuale dibattito critico-interpretativo, l'autore approfondisce le diverse fasi del pensiero del filosofo austriaco, i principali temi da lui trattati e i metodi filosofici adottati, con un costante e puntuale rimando alle sue opere, prime fra tutte il Tractatus logico-philosophicus (1922) e le Ricerche filosofiche (pubblicate postume nel 1953).Luigi Perissinotto è professore di Filosofia del Linguaggio presso l'Università Ca' Foscari di Venezia. È membro della Società Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio, della Società Italiana di Filosofia Analitica, della Associazione Italiana per gli Studi di Filosofia e Teologia, della Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society, della British Wittgenstein Society, della Società Italiana di Studi Kantiani. È direttore della rivista “Jolma. The Journal for the Philosophy of Language, Mind and the Arts”. La sua attività di ricerca si è concentrata su due temi fondamentali, che hanno come punto di riferimento la questione filosofica del linguaggio e il problema del nesso linguaggio-interpretazione: la filosofia di Ludwig Wittgenstein, nelle sue diverse articolazioni e nella complessità delle relazioni che essa intrattiene con la filosofia contemporanea; i differenti modi in cui nella filosofia contemporanea, sia nel suo versante analitico che nella prospettiva ermeneutica, sono stati affrontati i problemi del significato, del linguaggio, della verità. È autore di numerosi saggi ed articoli, tra cui, in particolare, alcuni dedicati al pensiero di Gottfried W. Leibniz, di Ludwig Wittgenstein e di Donald Davidson. Si è occupato anche di consulenza filosofica. Tra le sue pubblicazioni: Le vie dell'interpretazione nella filosofia contemporanea (Roma-Bari 2002); Wittgenstein. Una guida (Milano 1997, 2017); Introduzione a Wittgenstein (Bologna 2018); ha curato il Tractatus logico-philosophicus di Wittgenstein (con Pasquale Frascolla, Milano 2022).IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.itQuesto show fa parte del network Spreaker Prime. Se sei interessato a fare pubblicità in questo podcast, contattaci su https://www.spreaker.com/show/1487855/advertisement

La RAI Radiotelevisione Italiana (RAI Educational), in collaborazione con l'Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici e con l'Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, si è proposta di diffondere nel mondo, tramite le nuove forme di espressione e di comunicazione sociale consentite oggi dalla tecnica, la conoscenza della filosofia nel suo svolgimento storico e nei termini vivi della cultura contemporanea. A tale scopo è nata, nel 1987, l'Enciclopedia multimediale delle scienze filosofiche, che è anche un laboratorio di sperimentazione di nuovi linguaggi, nuove tecnologie e modelli organizzativi. Un'impresa ardua che regge sopra un paradosso: la cultura infatti è l'unico bene dell'umanità che, se diviso fra tutti, piuttosto che diminuire, poiché ciascuno ne riceverebbe solo una parte, diventa più grande, perché molti partecipano a esso. Questa peculiarità della cultura, che spiazza le rigide leggi del mercato, può forse spiegare perché quest'opera sia nata all'interno della RAI Radiotelevisione Italiana piuttosto che in una televisione commerciale. La RAI, in modo accorto, senza trascurare gli esiti commerciali, peraltro già tangibili, e prima ancora di qualunque altro ente televisivo europeo, americano o giapponese, ha dimostrato ancora una volta di sapere svolgere un'insostituibile funzione etico-civile legata alla sua vocazione di servizio pubblico. Quest'opera è stata fatta propria dall'UNESCO che, "considerato l'alto valore scientifico e culturale di quest'enciclopedia, si impegna a garantirne la massima diffusione possibile attraverso le televisioni pubbliche di tutti gli Stati membri dell'organizzazione, attivando la sua rete di istituti, agenzie e collaboratori". (dall'accordo RAI-UNESCO siglato a Parigi il 17 dicembre 1996). I princìpi e le finalità che hanno ispirato questa enciclopedia sono contenuti in un Appello per la filosofia che l'Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici, la RAI e l'Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana hanno rivolto ai governi e ai parlamenti di tutti i paesi del mondo. Renato Parascandolo ####################################################################################### Nell'aprile del 2002 Odifreddi ha registrato per l'Enciclopedia Multimediale delle Scienze Filosofiche, diretta da Renato Parascandolo, una Storia della logica in 24 lezioni-interviste di circa mezz'ora l'una, raccolte nel 2007 da Rai Trade in un cofanetto di 6 dvd. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vito-rodolfo-albano7/message

Putting I at the centre, the Ich, was the creed of philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte whilst Friedrich Schelling, saw the self as at one with the rest of nature: naturphilosophie. These competing ideas were debated in literary salons in the German town of Jena in the 1790s and Andrea Wulf's new biography Magnificent Rebels: The First Romantics and the Invention of the Self tells this story. She joins Anne McElvoy alongside New Generation Thinker Dr Seán Williams and the musicologist and Classical music biographer, Stephen Walsh, author of The Beloved Vision: Music in the Romantic Age. Producer: Ruth Watts This edition features discussion of music inspired by the Jena writers and extracts of: Franz Schubert, “Gretchen am Spinnrade” sung by Bernarda Fink (soprano) with Gerold Huber (piano), Harmonia Mundi, HMC901991 Weber, Der Freischütz, Rundfunkchor Leipzig, Staatskapelle Dresden, Carlos Kleiber Deutsche Grammophon, 4577362 You can find other programmes exploring German culture and thinking in the Free Thinking archives and available to download as Arts & Ideas podcasts including ETA Hoffmann https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00188r7 Rainer Maria Rilke https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0016k0v Wittgenstein's Tractatus https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000wcwk The 1920s Philosophy's Golden Age https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000q380 The Tin Drum https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05stw9v Thomas Mann https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001025h

Je dagelijkse portie muzikale verwondering. Welkom in mijn wonderkamer, vol muziek, verhalen en voorwerpen. Een muzikale reis door eeuwen, windstreken en genres. ‘Tractatus' Over de muzikale smaak van Ludwig Wittgenstein Meer zien? Klik hier (https://www.nporadio4.nl/klassiek/podcasts/609fd1a4-2bf8-4662-9fdb-d984939f2cf9/dit-hoor-je-deze-week-in-franks-klassieke-wonderkamer-week-42-17-t-m-21-oktober) Josef Labor Kwartet voor piano, viool, altviool en cello, op.6, dl.II & III Oliver Triendl (piano) Nina Karmon (viool) Pauline Sachse (altviool) Justus Grimm (cello) Franks Klassieke Wonderkamer is straks niet meer via de Bach van de Dag feed te beluisteren. Niks missen? Abonneer je dan op de podcast Franks Klassieke Wonderkamer. 

Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, published in English for the first time a century ago thanks to the efforts of his tutor at Cambridge Bertrand Russell, set out to solve all of the problems of philosophy in less than 100 pages, through a hierarchically numbered series of logical statements, or prepositions. He didn't succeed, exactly – indeed, Wittgenstein himself was one of the book's harshest critics – but that didn't stop it becoming widely recognised as the most important work of philosophy of the 20th century. And its influence has extended into other artistic and intellectual fields too, from literature to cinema and music, and beyond.Joining Ray Monk, biographer of Wittgenstein and Russell and professor of analytic philosophy, for a conversation about the power of the Tractatus and the unparalleled breadth of its influence, were Signe Gjessing, whose Tractatus Philosophico-Poeticus, a dazzling poetic reimagining, was published earlier this year, and the celebrated composer, musician and interdisciplinary pioneer Max Richter. The conversation will be chaired by Sam Kinchin-Smith, Head of Special Projects at the LRB. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this mini-episode, we discuss , The Tractatus, Wittgenstein's picture theory of language, the structure of the work, why metaphysics is impossible, and much more.Two Guys One Book is now in podcast form! It is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Please consider subscribing directly to our feed so you get updates in your podcast catcher whenever a new podcast goes live!Follow us on Goodreads to see what we're reading:https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/96149881-max-chapinhttps://www.goodreads.com/user/show/96136938-pedro-michelsYou can also watch the video here: This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit maxchapin.substack.com

“Bound by trends, other people's wardrobes and CD collections are pretty predictable, but their bookcases are places of near-infinite possibility, where what's implied by a copy of Wuthering Heights (1847) depends upon whether it's shelved next to Wittgenstein's Tractatus (1922), a weight-loss manual or Sun Tzu's Art of War (c.400BC). What other people's bookshelves never tell us, however, is the “why” behind each book. The “why” is about the roots of literacy, and these are often grubby, underground things.” Tina reached back into the archive to find Tom Morton's "The Roots of Literacy", from our 5th anniversary issue in 2003, to celebrate the launch of our Summer Reader. Head here to read the essay and to our online shop to buy your own copy of the 2022 Summer Reader.   Tank Magazine · 22.06 TANK Podcast

“Bound by trends, other people's wardrobes and CD collections are pretty predictable, but their bookcases are places of near-infinite possibility, where what's implied by a copy of Wuthering Heights (1847) depends upon whether it's shelved next to Wittgenstein's Tractatus (1922), a weight-loss manual or Sun Tzu's Art of War (c.400BC). What other people's bookshelves never tell us, however, is the “why” behind each book. The “why” is about the roots of literacy, and these are often grubby, underground things.” Tina reached back into the archive to find Tom Morton's "The Roots of Literacy", from our 5th anniversary issue in 2003, to celebrate the launch of our Summer Reader. Head here to read the essay and to our online shop to buy your own copy of the 2022 Summer Reader.   Tank Magazine · 22.06 TANK Podcast

The team reassembles to talk Wittgenstein, champion of "ideas-don't-matter" philosophy, and about why he matters—even if ideas don't. The primary sources referenced throughout this ep are the Tractatus (https://amzn.to/3t0wD56) for Mr. Early Wittgenstein, and Philosophical Investigations (https://amzn.to/3wVfUkC) for Mr. Late Wittgenstein.

What does a Bengali intellectual and poet have in common with a British-Austrian logician and philosopher? In Language, Limits, and Beyond: Early Wittgenstein and Rabindranath Tagore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Priyambada Sarkar explores the shared fascination both of these figures have with the limitations of language, the nature of the ineffable, and the role of poetry in our appreciatin both. While we know that the young Ludwig Wittgenstein read Tagore's works to the Vienna Circle, Sarkar goes beyond this and other biographical anecdotes to demonstrate the depth of his interest in Tagore and the resonance between their approaches to language. She argues that while philosophers, according to early Wittgenstein, should maintain silence about certain domains, this does not extend to the poet or the artist, who is able to show, indirectly, what is beyond the threshold of language: the ethical, the religious, and the aesthetic. Tagore's works themselves not only exemplify this capacity, but reflect on this possibility itself, and it is for this reason, Sarkar explains, that they are fruitfully read alongside of the Tractatus. Malcolm Keating is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Yale-NUS College. His research focuses on Sanskrit philosophy of language and epistemology. He is the author of Language, Meaning, and Use in Indian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Press, 2019) and host of the podcast Sutras (and stuff). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/philosophy

What does a Bengali intellectual and poet have in common with a British-Austrian logician and philosopher? In Language, Limits, and Beyond: Early Wittgenstein and Rabindranath Tagore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Priyambada Sarkar explores the shared fascination both of these figures have with the limitations of language, the nature of the ineffable, and the role of poetry in our appreciatin both. While we know that the young Ludwig Wittgenstein read Tagore's works to the Vienna Circle, Sarkar goes beyond this and other biographical anecdotes to demonstrate the depth of his interest in Tagore and the resonance between their approaches to language. She argues that while philosophers, according to early Wittgenstein, should maintain silence about certain domains, this does not extend to the poet or the artist, who is able to show, indirectly, what is beyond the threshold of language: the ethical, the religious, and the aesthetic. Tagore's works themselves not only exemplify this capacity, but reflect on this possibility itself, and it is for this reason, Sarkar explains, that they are fruitfully read alongside of the Tractatus. Malcolm Keating is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Yale-NUS College. His research focuses on Sanskrit philosophy of language and epistemology. He is the author of Language, Meaning, and Use in Indian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Press, 2019) and host of the podcast Sutras (and stuff). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

What does a Bengali intellectual and poet have in common with a British-Austrian logician and philosopher? In Language, Limits, and Beyond: Early Wittgenstein and Rabindranath Tagore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Priyambada Sarkar explores the shared fascination both of these figures have with the limitations of language, the nature of the ineffable, and the role of poetry in our appreciatin both. While we know that the young Ludwig Wittgenstein read Tagore's works to the Vienna Circle, Sarkar goes beyond this and other biographical anecdotes to demonstrate the depth of his interest in Tagore and the resonance between their approaches to language. She argues that while philosophers, according to early Wittgenstein, should maintain silence about certain domains, this does not extend to the poet or the artist, who is able to show, indirectly, what is beyond the threshold of language: the ethical, the religious, and the aesthetic. Tagore's works themselves not only exemplify this capacity, but reflect on this possibility itself, and it is for this reason, Sarkar explains, that they are fruitfully read alongside of the Tractatus. Malcolm Keating is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Yale-NUS College. His research focuses on Sanskrit philosophy of language and epistemology. He is the author of Language, Meaning, and Use in Indian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Press, 2019) and host of the podcast Sutras (and stuff). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

What does a Bengali intellectual and poet have in common with a British-Austrian logician and philosopher? In Language, Limits, and Beyond: Early Wittgenstein and Rabindranath Tagore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Priyambada Sarkar explores the shared fascination both of these figures have with the limitations of language, the nature of the ineffable, and the role of poetry in our appreciatin both. While we know that the young Ludwig Wittgenstein read Tagore's works to the Vienna Circle, Sarkar goes beyond this and other biographical anecdotes to demonstrate the depth of his interest in Tagore and the resonance between their approaches to language. She argues that while philosophers, according to early Wittgenstein, should maintain silence about certain domains, this does not extend to the poet or the artist, who is able to show, indirectly, what is beyond the threshold of language: the ethical, the religious, and the aesthetic. Tagore's works themselves not only exemplify this capacity, but reflect on this possibility itself, and it is for this reason, Sarkar explains, that they are fruitfully read alongside of the Tractatus. Malcolm Keating is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Yale-NUS College. His research focuses on Sanskrit philosophy of language and epistemology. He is the author of Language, Meaning, and Use in Indian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Press, 2019) and host of the podcast Sutras (and stuff). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

What does a Bengali intellectual and poet have in common with a British-Austrian logician and philosopher? In Language, Limits, and Beyond: Early Wittgenstein and Rabindranath Tagore (Oxford University Press, 2021), Priyambada Sarkar explores the shared fascination both of these figures have with the limitations of language, the nature of the ineffable, and the role of poetry in our appreciatin both. While we know that the young Ludwig Wittgenstein read Tagore's works to the Vienna Circle, Sarkar goes beyond this and other biographical anecdotes to demonstrate the depth of his interest in Tagore and the resonance between their approaches to language. She argues that while philosophers, according to early Wittgenstein, should maintain silence about certain domains, this does not extend to the poet or the artist, who is able to show, indirectly, what is beyond the threshold of language: the ethical, the religious, and the aesthetic. Tagore's works themselves not only exemplify this capacity, but reflect on this possibility itself, and it is for this reason, Sarkar explains, that they are fruitfully read alongside of the Tractatus. Malcolm Keating is Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Yale-NUS College. His research focuses on Sanskrit philosophy of language and epistemology. He is the author of Language, Meaning, and Use in Indian Philosophy (Bloomsbury Press, 2019) and host of the podcast Sutras (and stuff). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/south-asian-studies

"Our time is the age of postmodernity and of the clash of epochs. But a new age of humanity is rising. It is evolutionity or the evolutionary epoch which replaces modernity and postmodernity." Such is the powerful argument of W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz in his book Tractatus Politico-Philosophicus: New Directions for the Future Development of Humankind (Routledge, 2017). Within this major paradigm shift that is underway, many fundamental principles about the world will either have to be deeply questioned or reaffirmed in the case of those virtues that have been long forgotten. The ultimate goal will be the further development of humanity into a more "happy society". W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz is a philosopher and political theorist. He is considered one of the most renowned intellectuals in his native Poland. He received his doctorate at the University of Oxford. In the early 1980's, he was a student leader in Poland's Solidarity movement, and was then awarded a scholarship of the Leadership Development Office of the Presbyterian Church (USA). He is the author of five books, including On the History of Political Philosophy (Routledge, 2016).  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

"Our time is the age of postmodernity and of the clash of epochs. But a new age of humanity is rising. It is evolutionity or the evolutionary epoch which replaces modernity and postmodernity." Such is the powerful argument of W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz in his book Tractatus Politico-Philosophicus: New Directions for the Future Development of Humankind (Routledge, 2017). Within this major paradigm shift that is underway, many fundamental principles about the world will either have to be deeply questioned or reaffirmed in the case of those virtues that have been long forgotten. The ultimate goal will be the further development of humanity into a more "happy society". W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz is a philosopher and political theorist. He is considered one of the most renowned intellectuals in his native Poland. He received his doctorate at the University of Oxford. In the early 1980's, he was a student leader in Poland's Solidarity movement, and was then awarded a scholarship of the Leadership Development Office of the Presbyterian Church (USA). He is the author of five books, including On the History of Political Philosophy (Routledge, 2016).  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

"Our time is the age of postmodernity and of the clash of epochs. But a new age of humanity is rising. It is evolutionity or the evolutionary epoch which replaces modernity and postmodernity." Such is the powerful argument of W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz in his book Tractatus Politico-Philosophicus: New Directions for the Future Development of Humankind (Routledge, 2017). Within this major paradigm shift that is underway, many fundamental principles about the world will either have to be deeply questioned or reaffirmed in the case of those virtues that have been long forgotten. The ultimate goal will be the further development of humanity into a more "happy society". W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz is a philosopher and political theorist. He is considered one of the most renowned intellectuals in his native Poland. He received his doctorate at the University of Oxford. In the early 1980's, he was a student leader in Poland's Solidarity movement, and was then awarded a scholarship of the Leadership Development Office of the Presbyterian Church (USA). He is the author of five books, including On the History of Political Philosophy (Routledge, 2016).  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Photography is highly valued as a recording medium. Traditionally it has been claimed that photography is fundamentally a causal recording process, and that every photograph is the causal imprint of the world in front of the camera. In this paper I seek to challenge that traditional view. I claim that it is based on a ‘single-stage' misconception of the process that defines photographs as mind-independent images and leaves no room for photographic depiction. I explain my objections to that view and propose an alternative, ‘multi-stage' account of the process, in which I argue that causal registration of light is not equivalent to recording and reproducing an image. The proposed account can explain how photography functions as an exemplary recording medium, without supposing that every photograph is a mind-independent causal imprint of the world. Intervention or non-intervention by photographers is a more complex matter than the traditional view allows. Using the framework of the multistage account, I describe three different ways that photographic pictures can be produced. Dawn Phillips studied at the University of Durham and wrote her PhD on Wittgenstein's say-show distinction. She held philosophy positions at Kent, Cork, Southampton, Oxford, and Warwick. In 2011 she became a Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Hull and, also, became Dawn Wilson. Dawn has published on Wittgenstein early and late, particularly the Tractatus, including articles on logical analysis, clarity, symbolism, the picture theory of language and the expression of thought. With David Connearn, she co-authored an article about Wittgenstein's House in Skjolden and co-ordinated an international letters campaign for the conservation of the house and its legacy. She is interested in language, thought and image, particularly in art and aesthetics and the philosophy of photography. Her article, ‘Photography and Causation', launched a field of debate known as the ‘New Theory' of photography and was selected as one of twelve classic texts to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the British Journal of Aesthetics. She recently published ‘Invisible Images and Indeterminacy: Why we need a Multi-stage Account of Photography' and she is co-authoring, with Laure Blanc-Benon, the photography entry for the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. She is writing a book titled Aesthetics and Photography for Bloomsbury, and articles on temporal representation, co-portraiture, and comparing photography with music. This podcast is an audio recording of Dr Wilson's talk - "Reflecting, Registering, Recording and Representing: From Light Image to Photographic Picture" - at the Aristotelian Society on 7th March 2022. This recording was produced by the Backdoor Broadcasting Company.

Joel and Travis finish Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus in this episode. Why do smart people, like babies, stare at the finger rather than where it is pointing? And what does this have to do with talk of God and debating empirical data? Also, when should we be silent? All that is answered...sort of...in this podcast.

This week join Mike and Danny as they take to the skies on the start of their much anticipated world tour. Yes, come fly with us, let's fly, let's fly away. If you can use some exotic philosophy come and join us on Wednesday. Come fly with us, let's fly, let's fly away. I'm not going to lie to you, we know each other far to well for that now, but quite honestly, I think Danny has gone a bit funny. He's put all our funds in a duffle bag, along with his 12 copies of the Tractatus, and mumbled something about tragedy and Grease… yeah, I think that was what he said. Anyway, I'm pretty sure he's booked tickets for a Bee Gees tribute band. I'm just going to play along with him, after all, it will be cathartic for us both. I mean, weather-wise it's such a lovely day, right?

Joel and Travis discuss whether God is a toaster, the metaphysical value of pizza, and why it seems so hard to get anywhere in debates about opposing worldviews (like in apologetics). And all this with just some of Proposition 6 of Wittgenstein's Tractatus. This is the penultimate podcast in this series on the Tractatus.

Joel and Travis discuss propositions 5 and some of 6 from Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, a book perhaps most famous for no one in their right mind (outside of professional philosophy) reading it. Nevertheless, it has had tremendous, if confused, influence on philosophy and may be the most important book written last century.

En el episodio 39 invité con gran gusto a mi amigo Jorge Torres, estudiante de la licenciatura en filosofía. Juntos hablaremos de los problemas que observamos en el presente respecto al lenguaje, recordando al gran filósofo del siglo XX Ludwig Wittgenstein y su Tractatus logicus-philosophicus

Joel and Travis talk Wittgenstein's Tractatus, propositions 3 and 4. Joel says stuff about what can be said and what can only be shown, how this relates to not saying what cannot be said, and says showing a sad shed should sell said shed's shady sheerness . Well, he doesn't talk about that last bit, but he does try to explain Wittgenstein's thoughts on stuff like the say-show distinction, and related matters, which is almost as interesting as silly tongue twisters.

Joel and Travis talk Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, a book that, if you were to read it, would add the "cus" to your "philosophi". But you need not worry, Joel and Travis have your back. They start digging into the book in this episode, working through some of the difficult stuff, while helping you keep an eye on what Wittgenstein is aiming toward--something brilliant, rich, and important.