[...] Berkeley is concerned to show us that matter in the philosophical sense will be seen by the realistic spirit to be nothing but a philosophical fantasy. In the Three Dialogues, Hylas is portrayed exactly as someone who has to be brought back to the modes of thinking of the realistic spirit, has to be helped to remove the false glasses that have been so painfully obstructing his vision of reality.That image, of glasses painfully obstructing which we do not see that we can remove, is in Wittgenstein too, used by him in somewhat different ways, but there are important similarities. Hylas has taken himself all along to be like someone wearing distorting spectacles: he has (or so he has thought) only the dimmest grasp of things as they really are, independent of perception, because he knows them only indirectly, through perception. The removal of the glasses is the recognition, through philosophical discussion, that his perceptions never were something between him and the real: he has all along (unbeknownst to his bemused self) been what is real. With the 'removal' of the glasses he is able to take a totally different view of the reality of what he perceives; he no longer peers vainly for something beyond it.
In Wittgenstein's use of the image, the philosopher who takes himself to be wearing irremovable glasses does not take these to be distorting his view. The 'glasses' here are the underlying logical order of all thought, the philosopher the author of the Tractatus. Because he is convinced that all thought must have this order, he is convinced that he is able to see it in the reality of our actual thought and talk, even though the ways we think and speak do not (to what he takes to be a superficial view ) appear to exhibit such an order.
[...]
What is common to both uses of the image of the glasses is that the philosopher who takes himself to be in them misrepresents to himself the significance of what is before his eyes, and takes himself to be concerned rather with the real nature of something , where that real nature is not open to view. The removal of the glasses is his being able to see properly what always was before him; what stood in the way of his removing them was a confused understanding of language. (pp. 43--44)
In Wittgenstein's use of the image, the philosopher who takes himself to be wearing irremovable glasses does not take these to be distorting his view. The 'glasses' here are the underlying logical order of all thought, the philosopher the author of the Tractatus. Because he is convinced that all thought must have this order, he is convinced that he is able to see it in the reality of our actual thought and talk, even though the ways we think and speak do not (to what he takes to be a superficial view ) appear to exhibit such an order.
[...]
What is common to both uses of the image of the glasses is that the philosopher who takes himself to be in them misrepresents to himself the significance of what is before his eyes, and takes himself to be concerned rather with the real nature of something , where that real nature is not open to view. The removal of the glasses is his being able to see properly what always was before him; what stood in the way of his removing them was a confused understanding of language. (pp. 43--44)
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário