Tractatus Two

(The title of this post is intended to reflect the philosophical method I'll be using in this post. It is not intended to reflect the philosophical content of this post. The method is, of course, stipulative or implicit definition. The mimicry in layout is just for fun. *smile* )

1 An assertion is a way of expressing that something is a certain way, usually by uttering an indicative sentence of a natural language.

1.1 Some examples of assertions are answers, aphorisms, and descriptions of a thing.

2 An illustration is a way of showing how things are, usually by some pedagogical action.

2.01 While we express assertions with claims of the form "Someone believes that something is a certain way", we express illustrations with claims of the form "Someone sees how something is a certain way".

2.1 Some examples of illustrations are allegories, analogies, demonstrations, thought experiments, proofs, and diagrams.

3 One thing philosophers do is assume assertions to be true. The assumption is that the meanings of different words are related in a fundamental way. Let's try to make this clear with an illustration of learning:

1. You have learned the meaning of the word "two" from some illustrations.
2. You have learned the meaning of the word "four" from some illustrations.
3. You have learned the meaning of the word "plus" from some illustrations.
4. You have learned the meaning of the word "equals" from some illustrations.
   __________________________________________________
   Therefore, you are entitled to say "two plus two equals four".
   

3.1 When a person is entitled to say a sentence and he does say it, his assertion is true. When a person is not entitled to say a sentence, he is not entitled to assert a connection between the meanings of the words he uses, and his assertion may be false. A more general way to say this is that an assertion of mine is true and understood only when I have correctly learned the meanings of the words I use, and an assertion of mine is not understood and may be false or senseless when I have incorrectly learned the meanings of the words I use.

3.11 Assumption, then, involves the idea that the meanings of the words I use aren't up to me, but instead are dependent upon the community of speakers of a language.

3.2 Philosophers take advantage of differences in meaning and connections between meanings by making arguments. An argument is an assertion that the truth of a sentence or sentences illustrates how some other sentence is true.

3.21 We've used an argument above. There we were using the argument, but now we are going to talk about it. In that argument, some assertions were made, including the assertion that you have learned the meaning of the word "two". We were able to conclude from those assertions that you are entitled to say "two plus two equals four". By assumption, the conclusion is true.

3.22 Now, based on the fact that we understand the words in the following sentence, we are entitled to assert it:

A: It is true that you are entitled to say "two plus two equals four".

or, in other words,

A': Your assertion that two plus two equals four is true.

3.221 So, an argument takes one or more assertions and illustrates how by assumption some further assertion is true.

4 One thing philosophers do is assume illustrations to be good. The assumption is that the imports of different events are related in a fundamental way. Let's try to make this clear with an illustration of learning:

1. Benjamin Franklin learned how conductors with a sharp point were capable of discharging electricity silently and at great distance.
   
2. Benjamin Franklin learned how conductors with rounder, smoother points were less capable of discharging electricity silently and at less distance.
   __________________________________________________
   Therefore, Benjamin Franklin was entitled to show how lightning rods prevented homes from being damaged.
   

4.1 When a person is entitled to show a phenomenon and he does show it, his illustration is good. When a person is not entitled to show a phenomenon, he is not entitled to illustrate a connection between the imports of the events he sees, and his illustration may be bad. A more general way to say this is that an illustration of mine is good and understood only when I have correctly learned the imports of the events I see, and an illustration of mine is not understood and may be bad or worthless when I have improperly learned the imports of the events I see.

4.11 Assumption, then, involves the idea that the imports of the events I see aren't up to me, but instead are dependent upon the community of witnesses of a world.

4.2 Philosophers take advantage of differences in import and connections between imports by making predicaments. A predicament is an illustration how the good of a phenomenon or phenomena illustrates how some other phenomenon is good.

4.21 We've seen a predicament above. There we were seeing the predicament, but now we are going to talk about it. In that predicament, some illustrations were made, including the illustration how Benjamin Franklin learned how conductors with a sharp point were capable of discharging electricity silently and at great distance. We were able to permit from those illustrations how Benjamin Franklin was entitled to show how lightning rods prevented homes from being damaged. By assumption, the permission is good.

4.22 Now, based on the fact that we understand the words in the following sentence, we are entitled to assert it:

A: It is good how Benjamin Franklin was entitled to show how lightning rods prevented homes from being damaged.

or, in other words,

A': Benjamin Franklin's illustration how lighting rods prevented homes from being damaged was good.

4.221 So, a predicament takes one or more illustrations and illustrates how by assumption some further illustration is good.