Tractatus - Lets follow it

Duggys Housemate

Apparently it loses something in translation. Help me through it philosophers - i have a degree in mathematics, so lets assume I have some smarts.

Start with the first four.


1)
The world is everything that is the case.


Seems relatively meaningless. the world is not really explained in this sentence, unlike say - the Earth, the universe, the multiverse. It's a statement which can encompass everything, and nothing.

2)
What is the case, the fact, is the existence of atomic facts.

Does this follow from 2) - what fact? And what are the atomic facts made of. And why isn't the world made of objects not facts? What is meant here?

3
The logical picture of the facts is the thought.

I cant see how this follows from 2) is it some kind of idealist thought? And picture? Logical picture? What does that mean?

It seems that his flow here is wrong, even for idealists. Facts create thoughts? Objects haven't appeared yet, it appears.

4
The thought is the significant proposition.

This significant proposition is presumably a technical term. At least this seems to follow from 3) - as he is explaining "thought". What does he mean.

In total, what has been explained here? And then we can move on.

18AD

I have been meaning to look at this, but never have. I'll take a stab at interpretation.

Duggys Housemate wrote: »

1)
The world is everything that is the case.


Seems relatively meaningless. the world is not really explained in this sentence, unlike say - the Earth, the universe, the multiverse. It's a statement which can encompass everything, and nothing.

The world is traditionally the universe, or everything that exists. Everything that is the case, is, in fact.

2)
What is the case, the fact, is the existence of atomic facts.

Does this follow from 2) - what fact? And what are the atomic facts made of. And why isn't the world made of objects not facts? What is meant here?

What is the case = the fact. Atomic facts, I guess, are true statements. Things are atomic if they exist in themselves. Atomic fact is not relative fact/interpretation. It is not talking about scientific atoms.

There is more to existence than objects. The statement "I am wearing a hat" is true, it is the case. But this truth is not itself an object.
Statements about objects can also be true though.

3
The logical picture of the facts is the thought.

I cant see how this follows from 2) is it some kind of idealist thought? And picture? Logical picture? What does that mean?

It seems that his flow here is wrong, even for idealists. Facts create thoughts? Objects haven't appeared yet, it appears.

I assume the logical picture refers to the inter-relation between the atomic facts. Since the atomic facts exist in themselves, the picture is how they relate (logically).

4
The thought is the significant proposition.

This significant proposition is presumably a technical term. At least this seems to follow from 3) - as he is explaining "thought". What does he mean.

In total, what has been explained here? And then we can move on.

I'm not entirely sure.

I'm not sure what significant proposition could be here.