A Philosophical Analysis Of An Idea Presented By Ludwig Wittgenstein

With their powerful warning against ideological certainty, these books had a profound influence on my thinking which is now axiomatically anti-foundationalist. I now seek deeper understanding of, rather than a facile allegiance to any particular dogma. To that end, I try maintain an ideological

When a state of probability remains undetermined, we often feel compelled to define it. We desire certainty, so we obtain it through whichever way we see fit, even when it is unattainable or harmful to do so. When we imagine

By chiefly drawing on part II of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations (PI), I will advance the claim that his concepts of aspect perception and aspect dawning have ethical implications. These ethical implications are minimally worth considering, or maximally something that holds value. This paper is divided into three sections. Section one begins by defining aspect-perception and aspect-dawning, and then proceeds to distinguish ordinary perceptions of ‘seeing’ from visual perceptions of ‘seeing-as’. Section two starts by citing relevant passages where Wittgenstein alludes to possible examples of aspect perception and aspect dawning. By building on these

1. Describe the racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Why is their disparity in the CJS?

“Light can be found in even the darkest of times, if only one remembers how to turn on the light” - Albus Dumbledore from J.K. Rowling’s “Harry Potter” Like J.K Rowling, Elie Wiesel and Edgar Guest use imagery to reveal how they feel about the experiences they went through.

Does certainty actually provide security, or does it set one for failure? Does doubt cause negativity or does it prepare one for the future? The idea whether certainty or doubt causes the fulfillment of dreams, goals and the future as questioned many. Certainty creates security and assurances, but is anything certain? Nothing in the world is ever certain; one’s world can be flipped upside down in the matters of days, hours, minutes and even a split of a second. Unlike certainty, doubt allows one to know there is a chance that the odds are against one. William Lyon Phelps supports certainty as a factor for success, while Bertrand Russell favors doubt because it creates comfort and prepares one for reality. Using

In the following paper I intend to compare and contrast the three major philosophical viewpoints regarding this question, and come to a

The main issue addressed in this exposition is if “reliabilism is true, could we ever know whether we know anything? (If not, how big a problem would that be?)” According to the following evidence that will be presented, it is suggested that there is no way of knowing whether we know anything, when using the reliabilist form of justification as a way to reach truth. To begin, reliabilism is a form of justification where we do not need to account for the exact sources our beliefs come from because it “is externalist in character” (Handout 10). Moreover, a belief is justified if it was formed by an unconditionally reliable process, or by a conditionally reliable process that receives input from other conditional reliable processes that are

(p. 163). Moreover, “if the cultivation of the understanding consists in one thing more than in another, it is surely in learning the grounds of one’s own opinion. Whatever people believe on subjects on which it is of the first importance to believe rightly, they ought to be able to defend against at least the common objections” (p.

He calls on how doubt incites action, which leads to belief. In his example of how he would decide how to pay for his horse-car fare referring to how his doubt arises from momentary indecision and his decision in the end will become a belief he will later use. He uses another example of him waiting in the railway and analyzing the different routes he could take as how doubt can sometimes be intentional as well but nevertheless it always leads to belief. Belief is a very strong weapon, which Pierce, certainly attains much power to in making our ideas clear. Even as he mentions it may take years to achieve, once achieved it will stick with us. He also brings into attention consciousness, which can be immediate or mediate. He relates this to music and how we are immediately conscious of the notes while mediately conscious of the melody just like sensations are like notes and our thoughts like the melody. We must be aware of the difference between sensations and thoughts in order to fully understand the concept of belief. He states belief has three properties, it is something we are aware of, something that settles doubt and it results in a

For all of these, his life was full of wonders. Wittgenstein has become the father of not only one but two of the major movements of modern philosophy: the ideal language philosophy and ordinary language philosophy. His genius as a logician was astonishing; The famous Bertrand Russell virtually gave up serious philosophy not long after meeting him, and even when he later disagreed with Wittgenstein’s ideas, he kept his

In the selection, ‘Skeptical doubts concerning the operations of the understanding’, David Hume poses a problem for knowledge about the world. This question is related to the problem of induction. David Hume was one of the first who decided to analyze this problem. He starts the selection by providing his form of dividing the human knowledge, and later discusses reasoning and its dependence on experience. Hume states that people believe that the future will resemble the past, but we have no evidence to support this belief. In this paper, I will clarify the forms of knowledge and reasoning and examine Hume’s problem of induction, which is a challenge to Justified True Belief account because we lack a justification for our

It is logical to say that things happen for a reason. A ball, kicked by a child in a playground, flies through the air and eventually comes down to the ground. The child has kicked the ball enough times to expect that once the ball reaches its highest point, it will fall. Through experience of kicking the ball and it coming back to the ground, the child will develop expectations of this action. This thought process seems sound, yet a question of certainty arises. Can we be certain that future events will be like past events? Can we be certain that the ball will fall once it has been kicked? This concept was one of David Hume’s most famous philosophical arguments: the Problem of Induction. This paper will outline Hume’s standpoint, as well give criticism for his argument.

The controversy within the field and study of Philosophy is continuously progressing. Many ideas are prepared, and challenged by other philosophers causing the original idea to be analyzed more thoroughly. One of the cases that challenge many philosophers is The Problem of Induction. David Hume introduced the world to The Problem of Induction. The Problem of Induction claims that, past experiences can lead to future experiences. In this essay, I will explain how the problem of induction does not lead to reasonable solutions instead it causes philosophers more problems.

The connections between Ludwig Wittgenstein and Soren Kierkegaard as philosophers are not at all immediately obvious. On the surface, Wittgenstein deals with matters concerning the incorrect use of philosophical language and Kierkegaard focuses almost exclusively on answering the question 'how to become a Christian'. But this account belies deeper structural similarities between these men's important works. Thus, this paper suggests that their methods, rather than exclusively content, contain a strong parallel on which a natural and hopefully fruitful examination of their work can be based.