Titlebook: Readings of Wittgenstein’s On Certainty; Danièle Moyal-Sharrock,William H. Brenner Book 2005 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan P

Highbrow

Why Wittgenstein Isn’t a Foundationalistrgument. Suppose that knowledge is justified true belief: surely whatever justification we possess for a particular belief must itself involve knowledge (or at least justified belief). This simple observation seems to threaten us with an infinite regress of grounds for grounds for grounds, and so on

ordain

indigenous

Unravelling Certainty only of ., but also of ., and he uses other equivalent expressions.. Wittgenstein uses these terms in an attempt – inspired by G.E. Moore and Norman Malcolm’s discussions of the subject. – to circumscribe the nature of our basic assurance, of our assurance about such things as ‘Here is a hand’ or ‘

起波瀾

cruise

Wittgenstein, Global Scepticism and the Primacy of Practiceism. I will argue here that this is at best a misleading way of seeing things. Wittgenstein has important and interesting things to say about scepticism, but they do not by themselves justify a straightforward dismissal of scepticism in its more philosophically challenging forms. I shall also argue

滲透

諷刺滑稽戲劇

征稅

表被動(dòng)

conjunctiva

Wittgenstein and Classical Realismended, for example, by the Pythagoreans, Plato and Aristotle. It was opposed by the Sophists and Sceptics, who argued that the measure of things is in the human will as it expresses itself through the individual, social consensus or the conventions of language. In short, man is the measure of all things.