Abdurrazzaq Hesamifar
Abstract
Moore’s paradox is a proposition that can be true if it is not stated, but if it is stated, makes a paradox. This paradox has been raised in two forms, omission and commission, and since it was raised, many articles have been written about it, among them the contributions of John Williams has been ...
Read More
Moore’s paradox is a proposition that can be true if it is not stated, but if it is stated, makes a paradox. This paradox has been raised in two forms, omission and commission, and since it was raised, many articles have been written about it, among them the contributions of John Williams has been more than others, and the confrontation of his view with Hamid Vahid’s view on this issue has provided a good reflection of the conflict and the different opinions on it. Williams believes in two approaches: the epistemic approach and the conscious belief approach. According to the first approach, since uttering the Moorean proposition is unjustified, it requires epistemic defect, and according to the second approach, when it is uttered consciously, it makes a paradox. Hamid Vahid believes in the theory of incomplete interpretation approach, according to which the expression of Moore’s proposition defeats the principle of charity, which says that the speaker’s words should always be considered true, unless there is an evidence against it. In this article, the critique and counter-critique of these two contemporary philosophers about Moore’s Paradox is analyzed and examined.
Parisa Shakourzadeh; Abdurrazzaq Hesamifar
Abstract
This article studies the possibility of talking about ontology in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus. In the first step, we will consider various earlier readings of the first part of book, so called the "world" part and we will examine the theories of advocates and opponents of this ...
Read More
This article studies the possibility of talking about ontology in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus. In the first step, we will consider various earlier readings of the first part of book, so called the "world" part and we will examine the theories of advocates and opponents of this idea that tractatus includes some ontological views. In the next step, by analyzing and comparing the sentences of the first part of the book, we will try to gain an explicit understanding of the concept of world and other ostensibly ontological categories. After studying two prominent concepts of objects and facts, the findings of the inquiry suggest that the ontological and realistic readings of book are wrong and what they recognize as ontological part of the book, is actually a discussion about logic. ThusThe world in Tractatus is the logical space and the territory of thought, not our actual and concrete world as it seems initially.
