‘If we had a grammar set out in the form of a book, it
wouldn’t be a series of chapters side by side, it would have a different
structure. And it is here, if I am right that we would have to see the
distinction between phenomenological and non- phenomenological. There would be,
say a chapter about colours, setting out the rules for the use of colour-words;
but there would be nothing comparable in what the grammar had to say about the
words “not”, “or”, etc (the “logical constants”).
How does the temporal character of facts manifest itself?
How does it express itself, if not by certain expressions having to occur in
our sentences? That means: how does the temporal character of facts express
itself, if not grammatically? ”Temporal character” – that doesn’t mean that I
come at 5 o’clock, but that I come at some time or other, i.e. that my
proposition has the structure it has.
We are inclined to say that negation and disjunction are
connected with the nature of the proposition, but that time is connected with
its content rather than its nature.
But if the two are equally universal, how can it show itself
in grammar that one of them is connected with the nature of the proposition and
the other is not?
Or should I have said that time is not equally universal
since mathematical propositions can be negated and occur in disjunctions,
without being temporal. There is indeed a connection here, though this form of
portraying the matter is misleading.
But that shows what I mean by “proposition” or “the nature
of the proposition”.’
a proposition is a proposal – open to question – open to
doubt – uncertain
we can further describe – the
proposition – in terms of other proposals – i.e. ‘phenomenological’ –
‘non-phenomenological’ –
and we can describe the
proposition in other terms –
we can put forward the proposal
of form – and the proposal of content – the proposal of grammar
these are descriptive decisions –
to put forward a description of
the proposition in terms of logical constants – is to put forward a structural
description
and you can say it is a
description of possibility –
possibilities within a structure –
possibilities of manipulation –
of use –
and further we can question the
relation between a proposal of form and a proposal of content – in relation to
time
looking at a proposition in terms
of time – is one way of considering it
i.e. – is the form non-temporal
and the content temporal?
and if so how can this be?
this is the discussion
Wittgenstein embarks on
there is no necessity to describe
a proposal – in these terms
but by the same token – there is
nothing to stop you describing the proposition in this way
the proposition – any proposition
– is open to question – in any way
you want to question it – it is open to any doubts you have – open to any kind
of description –
it’s nature is uncertain
it strikes me that you can view
the proposition – be it ‘phenomenological’ – ‘non-phenomenological – mathematical
– or whatever – as temporal
I question and doubt – deal with
uncertainty – in time
and yes – I can regard the action
of questioning – of doubt – of uncertainty – as not being related to time –
i.e. a proposal is a proposal –
regardless of when it is put forward
why you would describe a
proposition in terms of either or both – depends just on what you are doing and
why – it’s a question of use
Wittgenstein asks –
‘how does the temporal character of facts express itself, if
not grammatically?’
firstly it is important to understand that a ‘fact’ is what
is proposed – a fact is a proposal
secondly – the proposal – in whatever form – is the expression
now you may wish to explain that – grammatically –
any ‘explanation’ though will be
a proposal – and as such an expression
there will be no ‘explanation’ of
the proposition – that is beyond question – that is beyond doubt –
no fix on the proposition
just as the proposition itself –
logically speaking is no fix – on anything
we propose – and just what that
amounts to – how we describe that action – how we account for it – is logically
speaking – up for grabs –
the point of a proposition is its
use –
and mostly – I think we run with
what is at hand – in whatever context we are operating in –
we have learnt usage –
and propositional usage is not an
optional extra – it is a natural necessity –
a natural necessity if we are to
be functioning human beings
however logically speaking –
any usage is open to question –
is uncertain
© greg t. charlton. 2015.
