As Wittgenstein says and extol, Chapter-4 ⇒ Kirno Sohochari

Previous Chapter Link:

As Wittgenstein says and extol, Chapter-3

As Wittgenstein says and extol, Chapter-2

As Wittgenstein says and extol, Chapter-1

1.12: “A logical picture of facts is a thought.”

1.13: “There can never be surprises in logic.”

1.14: “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”

1.15: “Logic fills the world: the limits of the world are also its limits.”/ We cannot therefore say in logic: This and this there is in the world, that there is not./ For that would apparently presuppose that we exclude certain possibilities, and this cannot be the case since otherwise logic must get/ outside the limits of the world : that is, if it could consider these limits from the other side also./ What we cannot think, that we cannot think: we cannot therefore say what we cannot think.”


Moral of the Quote to me: Sometime I bit puzzled to question me that what is logic and why do we think logically. Is it imperative to think logically? What does logic mean? What does it mean when we try to say that logical thought and expression is quite different from the expression of human mind, suppose the emotion? Does it mean that logic is the thoughtful feeler of emotion, whereof emotion cannot represent and analyze itself in a thoughtful gesture as logic does? What is the essentiality of cataloging our linguistic gestures by this division of emotion and logic? These questions bit whimsical but Wittgenstein oneself is being whimsical when he makes comments on logic. He tries to ascertain that logic is a process of thought and disconnected from other expression that perhaps unable to represent the thoughtfulness of our thoughtful mind.

Logic is a dual. It is a duality of thinking the uncertain in a certain way and back to the uncertain by the way.

Logic is a double-headed being. It is difficult to draw any borderline between logical perception and understanding. Perception depends on our relation with the world, where understanding depends on the fact that how is the perception perceived and examined by the mind to understand it. The sensory organs of the body are nothing but a receiver of our eventful relation to the world. Body organs are receiving the world as an eventful action but do not let try to justify that what they receive. They are unconscious about perception and understanding. These organs are the competent transmitter of the feeling that the world is eventful for its motion, where live and inert is the same part of the motion. We are an animated creature and animated for our diversified action to the world, where feeling is the carrier of these actions. It will wait to proclaim its identity by taking these actions in an emotional or logical path.

However, the answer of “what does logic means” is relates to the answer of what do we mean by feelings. Feeling of any action means that we have perhaps proficient to express it at any cost. Feeling is the stair of our linguistic expression. We talk to the world through language and words are the sensory beat of feelings. The question is that why we feel to division it by emotion and logic. Does the brain be signaling us to do this? What is the necessity to make the division between emotional words and logical words? The answer depends on our interaction to the surface, from where we transmit the feeling to the brain cell.

Logic is trying to be showing it critical. It is a critical certainty of thought, albeit the certainty is not the certainty that it will never to be questionable. It could be mechanical on its expression and sometime could express fuzzy words and maybe it could turn on emotional metaphysics. Logic is robustly depends on words. Lacking of proper words makes its path linear to critically examine and understand the fact of the world, where we could say that ‘The limit of my word is the limit of my logic.’

It is perhaps an interesting question that why do we trust on logic and for what reason we are trying to use it. The simple answer is that we use logic to find certain answer about our action. Fact is that the logical words are not stable as we think. Logic has its own anti-logic and the game is endless. This game jeopardized the certainty of any logical proposition and end of the day such logic proved it fragments. It is correct that logic is not surprising. It represents our thoughtful and analytical mind, but the mind has nothing difference to the emotional mind-frame of human. Logic and emotion both is fragment in nature and that is the limitation of thought. Our thoughtful mind is not robust enough to think clearly. Logical thinking bit metaphysical and metaphorical in that sense.


Quote 1.12 and 1.13 represents the logic as an essential carrier of crystal-clear thoughts and that should be stable on its linguistic gestures, but logic could not be stable on its gestures, because we are not the controller of our own thoughts indeed. The sensory organ and the brain cell are not obedient to carry the command. They are freelance and ruled by the law of nature and the evolution. Our sensory organs and the brain are logical and we could easily explain them logically but the functions of these organs are weird! We do not know what will wait for us when the wavelength tries to express it logical. Logic is always carries a probable upshot of emotional words and emotion carries the same opposite. Sometime it is tough to speculate the borderline of this linguistic expression.

We human used to think that emotion carries the unexpected and unexplained reaction that could be difficult to understand. We are saying that emotion reflex the lacking of thoughtfulness. It is the unconditional expression of feelings where language is unwanted to analyze itself. Logic is the beautiful invention of human language to fill the gap. Our thinking is perhaps not wrong. We need logic to analyze and represent our thoughtful curiosities to the world. Logic is essential there, but it is deprivation on the other hand. Because, we have to remember that the path of logic is perhaps whimsical; logical queries is an uncertain expression of confusion and question and doubt indeed.

Logic is a dual. It is a duality of thinking the uncertain in a certain way and back to the uncertain by the way. Logic is unsurprisingly surprising, because it cannot clear our thought as we wish to demand on it. Quote 1.14 and 1.15 is echoing the fact that ‘what is logic and what is not’ is critical to decide. What we yet cannot think logically does not mean that the thinking is impossible and it would not be possible to think it logically at future. Logic is a probable outcome of our linguistic signature to the world, where the Performance and Competence have played their rule in the brain cell. The limit of language depends on the game of our sensory organs and the neuron cells.