English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this paper is to show that “traditional” and “resolute” interpretations have not freed the Tractatus from the apparent paradoxical self-defeat: if its sentences are true, they are nonsense, but if they are nonsense, they are not true. Those readings give only a new clothing to it. On the one hand, Hacker’s “traditional” reading commits the Tractatus to a metaphysical conspiracy, which is incompatible with the aims of the book. On the other hand, the “resolute” reading of Diamond/Conant does not account for the complexity of the book and commits Wittgenstein to an authorial conspiracy, which contradicts his views on authorship. Grounded in the difficulties found in both sides of the current debate, I conclude this paper with the introduction of requirements that any interpretation of the Tractatus should fulfill.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO CLIMB THE LADDER? (A SIDEWAYS APPROACH)