推 DarkHolbach: 感謝你的回應，我會花一點時間去消化的 09/03 20:03
※ 引述《DarkHolbach (晨光榮耀(Morning Glory))》之銘言：
: A nothing will serve just as well as a something about which nothing could be
: said.
: 這句話好像是維根斯坦講的，我有點不清楚他想要表達甚麼，有人可以解釋一下嗎？
: 感謝。
這句話出自於PI的304，我先把這段打在下面（手邊的是2009版，翻譯有點不一樣）：
-But you will surely admit that there is a difference between pain-behaviour
with pain and pain-behaviour without pain.
-Admit it? What greater difference could there be?
-And yet you again and again reach the conclusion that the sensation itself
is a Nothing.
-Not at all. It's not a Something, but not a Nothing either! The conclusion
was only that a Nothing would render the same service as a Something about
which nothing could be said. We've only rejected the grammar which tends
to force itself on us here.
Wittgenstein在這裡談的是有關sensation (特別關於pain)主題。雖然有關於主觀的
sensation和private experience我們都不能用語言談（大致上，在PI裡Wittgenstein
主張語言的意義在於使用，而使用pain的時候，我們要能指涉到一個可以被社群所觀
察到的對象；例如：「桌子」之於放在客廳的桌子。但pain並沒有辦法被此種方式所
指涉，因此我們無法使用語言談pain），但這不代表sensation is a Nothing.
我們目前所擁有的宣稱是：我們不能談sensation。(nothing could be said)
而雖然我們可以說sensation is not a Something (which you can refer to)，但是
如果我們說It is a Nothing (because nothing could be said），那在這裡就跟說
it is a Something (something that nothing could be said)一樣。所以
Wittgenstein在304特別說了：It is not a Something, but not a Nothing either!
我的觀察啦。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 109.149.147.246
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/W-Philosophy/M.1441237492.A.4A6.html