I inferred that when talking about what is or isn’t human, you have to then define ‘human’, which leads to defining the human experience… we can’t reach a definition by going around experience, we have to act through it.

Yes, LW disowned it, but I think that it is still a seminal work. It certainly continues to inspire, I’d say even more so than Philosophical Investigations. To paraphrase Clancy Martin: I tend to read philosophy as if it’s fiction/story. And, yeah, the enigma and authority that the rigid analytical construct asserts is provocative. Easy; yes, it can be. But, I do understand Tractatus (or at least: I agree with you on what it addresses; what it defines.) :)

Aligning with LW’s mental state at the time, Tractatus then begins to address the mystical, the transcendent… And 5.6 is in that section of the book. Blake, Sabra, and Jereme were talking above about constructed metaphysical/pataphysical ideas, and I thought it would be apt to bring the discussion back around to this conceit: We cannot escape language, especially when trying to breach the mystical, and therefore everything remains a construct of language, thus: Blake’s original question cannot be answered, especially in this forum, or any forum!

The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.

Thoughts?

I inferred that when talking about what is or isn’t human, you have to then define ‘human’, which leads to defining the human experience… we can’t reach a definition by going around experience, we have to act through it.

Yes, LW disowned it, but I think that it is still a seminal work. It certainly continues to inspire, I’d say even more so than Philosophical Investigations. To paraphrase Clancy Martin: I tend to read philosophy as if it’s fiction/story. And, yeah, the enigma and authority that the rigid analytical construct asserts is provocative. Easy; yes, it can be. But, I do understand Tractatus (or at least: I agree with you on what it addresses; what it defines.) :)

Aligning with LW’s mental state at the time, Tractatus then begins to address the mystical, the transcendent… And 5.6 is in that section of the book. Blake, Sabra, and Jereme were talking above about constructed metaphysical/pataphysical ideas, and I thought it would be apt to bring the discussion back around to this conceit: We cannot escape language, especially when trying to breach the mystical, and therefore everything remains a construct of language, thus: Blake’s original question cannot be answered, especially in this forum, or any forum!

The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.

Thoughts?