Air crash - and update

[Cornet IV]

I never fully understood the point being made by this famous quotation


It may make sense in the current context.

There is perhaps a logical problem with this post. Was the quote originally written in English?

If there is any wisdom in that quote, now might be a time to follow it.

PS The original was in German, from the Tractatus - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tract...-Philosophicus

Can't answer any of this. I've always been so intimidated by his poker that I have avoided getting too close!

Anastasius - yes it is PPRuNe, still flogging the subject for all it's worth but this is characteristic of the reaction usually attendant upon these sad events.

[aeolium]

Whereof one cannot speak, therefore one must be silent.

Ludwig Wittgenstein

I liked Beckett's reported response to this quotation, in which he said something like (I can't find the precise reference): "But those are exactly the kind of things that have to be spoken of [or possibly, that I want to speak of]". Indeed, in his novel The Unnameable, Beckett's narrator says just this: "it is not I, about me....I shall have to speak of things of which I cannot speak....I shall never be silent - never."

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Yes - I think Wittgenstein was stating a literal fact; practically a tautology: if we literally cannot "speak" about something, then perforce we aren't able speak about it. Art (including literature) is often at its best when attempting the articulation of those thoughts and feelings "whereof one cannot speak" - literally "articulation": moving ideas into a position in which communication becomes possible.

"I have nothing to say - and I am saying it - and that is poetry."

[Serial_Apologist]

Yes - I think Wittgenstein was stating a literal fact; practically a tautology: if we literally cannot "speak" about something, then perforce we aren't able speak about it. Art (including literature) is often at its best when attempting the articulation of those thoughts and feelings "whereof one cannot speak" - literally "articulation": moving ideas into a position in which communication becomes possible.

"I have nothing to say - and I am saying it - and that is poetry."

Using Zen, an interpreter might say that at that point, words stop and the music begins. But I'd have to trawl through my Watts - by which time the world would have moved on...

[ahinton]

Yes - I think Wittgenstein was stating a literal fact; practically a tautology: if we literally cannot "speak" about something, then perforce we aren't able speak about it. Art (including literature) is often at its best when attempting the articulation of those thoughts and feelings "whereof one cannot speak" - literally "articulation": moving ideas into a position in which communication becomes possible.

"I have nothing to say - and I am saying it - and that is poetry."

Or, put another rather clumsier way, "I have something to say - and I have no words with which to say it - so I'd better reach for pen and manuscript paper"...

[JFLL]

I never fully understood the point being made by this famous quotation

""Whereof one cannot speak, therefore one must be silent."

It may make sense in the current context.

There is perhaps a logical problem with this post. Was the quote originally written in English?

If there is any wisdom in that quote, now might be a time to follow it.

PS The original was in German, from the Tractatus - http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tract...-Philosophicus

One thing Wittgenstein certainly didn't mean was that we shouldn't speak of the possible cause of air crashes out of squeamishness or uncertainty. He was a philosopher, and had bigger fish to fry.

[french frank]

I never fully understood the point being made by this famous quotation

Whereof one cannot speak, therefore one must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

According to the ODoQ, the context is clearer:

"Was sich überhaupt sagen lässt, lässt sich klar sagen; und wovon man nicht reden kann, darüber muss man schweigen."

"What can be said at all, can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be [is obliged to be] silent."

To give an example of what I think he would mean (a hobby-horse of mine ): if we aren't allowed to call 'classical music' anything which distinguishes it from other sorts of music, we are prevented from talking about it all. With ramifications. like 'What are the Proms for?' 'What is Radio 3's 'core proposition'?'

So no, I don't think it means: 'If we don't know anything for sure, we should shut up'.

[ahinton]

According to the ODoQ, the context is clearer:

"Was sich überhaupt sagen lässt, lässt sich klar sagen; und wovon man nicht reden kann, darüber muss man schweigen."

"What can be said at all, can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be [is obliged to be] silent."

To give an example of what I think he would mean (a hobby-horse of mine ): if we aren't allowed to call 'classical music' anything which distinguishes it from other sorts of music, we are prevented from talking about it all. With ramifications. like 'What are the Proms for?' 'What is Radio 3's 'core proposition'?'

So no, I don't think it means: 'If we don't know anything for sure, we should shut up'.

Agreed (and I'm sure that you can be allowed at least one hobby-horse!); it's surely a case of "whereof one cannot speak with authority at least for the time being". Facts are emerging frequently about this and, as long as no hard and fast conclusion is jumped at by anyone until sufficient relevant incontrovertible evidence has been found and published, I see no problem with discussing the matter in the imterim, especially given the gravity of its consequences and the need to address ways in which to try to minimise the risk of repeat occurrences as far as might be possible.

[vinteuil]

what I think he would mean (a hobby-horse of mine )

... I think he was writing specifically - technically - as a professional philosopher. The sentence serves to delimit what he saw as the territory of philosophy in contradistinction from other uses of language (poetic, rhetorical... ). Philosophy, as he then saw it, could / should only talk about such things as could be expressed clearly. I don't think Kierkegaard or Heidegger - or the later Wittgenstein - would have agreed with this reductive pronouncement.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dGrwg63GAI

.

[kernelbogey]

Whereof one cannot speak, therefore one must be silent. - Ludwig Wittgenstein

Using Zen, an interpreter might say that at that point, words stop and the music begins. But I'd have to trawl through my Watts - by which time the world would have moved on...

...or that it's a koan?

[jean]

]I never fully understood the point being made by this famous quotation

Whereof one cannot speak, therefore one must be silent.

Ludwig Wittgenstein

You've written therefore instead of thereof, so you've lost the logical connexion between the two statements that make up the sentence.

[Serial_Apologist]

...or that it's a koan?

Nothing so mysterious, kb:

http://www.alanwattsrecordings.com/product/ghosts-wittgenstein/

Click on the link indicator halfway down to hear AW speak.

[Anastasius]

So there we have it. Data from the Flight Recorder pretty well nails it. Lubitz did know what he was doing.

The repercussions are going to run on and on and on.

[Serial_Apologist]

So there we have it. Data from the Flight Recorder pretty well nails it. Lubitz did know what he was doing.

The repercussions are going to run on and on and on.

Maybe I am naive, but I would have assumed that one would have sufficient intuition about the person with whom one was going to share duties in the cockpit to spot anything untoward about that person that might give one pause before embarking.

[Anastasius]

Maybe I am naive, but I would have assumed that one would have sufficient intuition about the person with whom one was going to share duties in the cockpit to spot anything untoward about that person that might give one pause before embarking.

With respect, I think that you are perhaps being a little naive. Let's face it, if the pilot and co-pilot had never flown together before then how on earth would they know if anything was untoward? Even if they had flown together, on a busy flight deck unless the co-pilot is mumbling away to himself incoherently and rubbing his prayer beads then I doubt that the other pilot would notice anything untoward.

[I use the term 'himself' to cover all genders]