I used FSK as a convenience but it imply FSRC.
So far I have reviewed paragraphs 1 - 410 of 'On Certainty' and they all aligned with the principles of the FSRC.
Based on my previous reading of the whole of "On Certainty" I am confident the majority of the rest 266 paragraphs are in the same mode.
To save time and space, here are paragraphs 1-16 [see next post for details] which indicate they all aligned with the FRSC as agreed by AI [wR]:
[ME] Topic: Wittgenstein's On Certainty.
My thesis is Wittgenstein's On Certainty fundamental is 'whatever exists is conditioned upon a Framework and System of Knowledge [FSK] and the language-game is a subset of the FSK.
I believe Wittgenstein represent "know" in terms of 'personal knowing' instinctual-animal-like-knowing and knowing as conditioned to a FSK [e.g. science, cosmology, mathematics, history, linguistic etc.]
Here are paragraphs 1-16 where I have made comments in [..] brackets in alignment to my thesis above.
Are my comments reasonable?
.................
Here are AI's comments:
Discuss??AI wrote:Your comments in the brackets are mostly reasonable!
They accurately reflect the core of your thesis about Wittgenstein's concept of "knowing" in "On Certainty."
Here's a breakdown of your points and some additional considerations:
Strengths of Your Comments:
• Highlighting Framework and System of Knowledge (FSK): You correctly identify that Wittgenstein emphasizes the role of frameworks and systems of knowledge in shaping what we consider "knowing."
• Distinguishing Personal and FSK-based Knowing: You differentiate between personal, instinctual knowing and knowing conditioned by an FSK, which aligns with Wittgenstein's critique of Moore's foundationalist approach to certainty.
Points for Further Exploration:
• Nuances of "Personal Knowing": Wittgenstein might not explicitly categorize "knowing" as purely personal or instinctual. It could be a combination of basic experiences and the language-game we're embedded in.
• Degrees of Certainty within FSKs: Not all FSKs offer the same level of certainty. Science provides a high degree in some areas, while history might have more uncertainty. Your comments could explore this nuance.
• Clarity and Objectivity: You suggest personal knowing might lack objectivity. However, Wittgenstein might argue that "objectivity" itself is shaped by an FSK.
Here's a breakdown of each paragraph and your comments:
Paragraphs 1-2:
• Comment: Reasonable. You highlight the distinction between personal knowing and knowing based on a Framework and System of Knowledge (FSK).
Paragraph 3:
• Comment: Reasonable. The "possibility of satisfying oneself" can be seen as relying on the rules and procedures within a specific language game (e.g., scientific observation).
Paragraph 4:
• Comment: Reasonable. You raise a good point about the FSK being unclear. Here, it could be the FSK of everyday experience or even biology.
Paragraphs 5 & 6:
•Comment: Reasonable. These paragraphs emphasize the role of the FSK in determining what counts as true or false.
Paragraph 7:
• Comment: This is debatable. "Knowing" here could be based on both personal experience (seeing a chair) and the FSK of language and shared practices.
Paragraph 8:
• Comment: Reasonable. You highlight the difference between certainty within a specific FSK and the question of overall objectivity.
Paragraph 9:
• Comment: Reasonable. Knowing here could be based on personal conviction (seeing someone sick) or a medical FSK (diagnosis).
Paragraph 10:
•Comment: Reasonable. You correctly point out the need to specify an FSK (science, arithmetic) for knowledge claims.
Paragraphs 11-13:
• Comment: Reasonable. These paragraphs highlight the ambiguity of "I know" and the need to consider the FSK involved.
Paragraphs 14-16:
• Comment: Reasonable. These paragraphs discuss establishing certainty within an FSK and the limitations of personal assurances.
Here are some suggestions for revising your comments:
• Paragraph 1: Instead of "personal, instinct" you could use "pre-reflective experience" or "basic certainty."
• Paragraph 4, 8, 10: You could acknowledge the possibility that personal experience might play a role within certain FSKs (e.g., feeling a pulse in medicine).
• Paragraph 8, 15, 16: Instead of "objective certainty" you could use "certainty within a specific FSK" or "varying degrees of justification."
Overall, your comments provide a good starting point for understanding Wittgenstein's ideas on "knowing" in "On Certainty." By refining the language and acknowledging some complexities, you can strengthen your analysis.
Further Exploration:
Consider exploring these concepts further:
• Wittgenstein's concept of language games
• Critique of foundationalism
• Skepticism and the limits of knowledge
This will help you build a more nuanced understanding of Wittgenstein's arguments in "On Certainty."
Views??