《逻辑哲学论》 (最后部分节选)

 

(奥)维特根斯坦 著

 

贺绍甲 译 韦森选摘

 

选者的话:在当代人类思想的学术殿堂中,路德维希·维特根斯坦是一位举世公认的思想大师。维特根斯坦于1889年4月26日生于维也纳的一家豪门。1911年来到剑桥三一学院师从当时的名哲学家罗素。1913年维特根斯坦离开剑桥,在德奥军中服役,并参与了第一次世界大战。在第一次世界大战结束前不久,维氏曾经被俘。就是在意大利的一个战俘营中,维特根斯坦构思并草撰了《逻辑哲学论》这一当代哲学史上划时代的著作。获释后,维特根斯坦曾把这本只有短短75页的小巨书草稿,寄予他在剑桥的老师罗素。罗素慧眼识金,并尽其影响力促其出版。但据说,在维特根斯坦读过罗素为该书所写的序言后,大为失望,说其师根本不懂他的哲学,因而拒绝出版。结果,该书最初于1921年以德文在《自然哲学年鉴》上发表,因此也曾引致师生间的一些不快。后来,维特根斯坦恢复了与罗素的友谊。1922年,在罗素的影响下,由C. K. Ogden 和剑桥另一位英年早逝的思想天才F. P. Ramsey把该书翻译为英文。1922年,英国著名出版社Routledge & Kegan Paul 出版了该书的德、英双语对照本,书名却自此沿用了拉丁文:Tractatus Logico-Philosohicus,意在严谨,也寓示着哲学的开始和终结。该书出版后,立刻在世界范围内引起巨大反响。

 

1929年春,维特根斯坦再返剑桥,成为三一学院的Fellow。维特根斯坦曾以其《逻辑哲学论》的巨大影响,直接获剑桥大学哲学博士学位,并从1939年开始,荣任剑桥哲学首座(Chair)多年。值得一提的是,在维特根斯坦逝世后于1953年出版的《哲学研究》中,维氏完全推翻了他自己在《逻辑哲学论》中的观点,改变了他对世界的早期看法,从而完成了哲学家的自我否定。这也成了哲学史上有口皆碑的一段佳话。

 

维特根斯坦哲学晦涩难懂,语言风格怪异,每一句话均象格言警句,并用§2.13521之类的独特序号标出。下面我们分别按维特根斯坦这本巨著最新英文和中文译本,选载该书 §6.4节之后的最后文句 —— 这就是维特根斯坦思想!这就是维特根斯坦风格!这就是伟大的剑桥:这一人杰地灵之地上产生出的人类思想精品!

 

亲爱的读者,在剑桥,你也许正在自然科学的王国中从事物理学、化学、医学、生物学和数学等学科的课题研究,你也许正在人文科学的领域中思考着哲学、经济学、法学、社会学、政治学、伦理学、人类学、考古学、语言学、史学、美学、文学和神学等等问题。在闲暇之余,如能读读维特根斯坦,了解一点其人、其事、其哲学,从其隽永、怪异、深不可测但却又似大智若愚的文句中读出点什么,对你学术理路的长进,对你人生之径的选择,均可能不无助益。

 

 

 

6.4 所有命题都是同等价值的。

 

 

 

6.41 世界的意义必定在世界之外。世界中一切事情就如它们之所是而是,如它们之所发生而发生;世界中不存在价值棗如果存在价值,那它也会是无价值的。

 

如果存在任何有价值的价值,那么它必定处在一切发生的和既存的东西之外。因为一切发生的和既存的东西都是偶然的。

 

使它们成为非偶然的那种东西,不可能在世界之中,以为如果在世界之中,它本身就是偶然的了。

 

它必定在世界之外。

 

 

 

6.42 所以也不可能有伦理命题。

 

命题不能表达更高的东西。

 

 

 

6.421 很清楚,伦理是不可说的。

 

伦理是超验的。

 

(伦理和美学是同一个东西)

 

 

 

6.422 当列出一个你应该。。。。。。形式的伦理规范时,人们首先的一个想法就是如果我不这样做又怎么样呢?可是很清楚,伦理和通常意义下的奖和惩没有什么关系。所以关于行为后果的问题必定是不重要的。棗至少那些后果不是重大事件。但是这问题的提出必有某种正确的东西。确实应该有某种伦理的奖励和伦理的惩罚,但是这些必须就包含在行动本身之中。

 

(同样也很清楚,奖励应该是某种愉快的东西,而惩罚应该是某种不愉快的东西。)

 

 

 

6.423 作为伦理主体的意志是不可说的。

 

而作为一种现象的意志只有心理学才感到兴趣。

 

 

 

6.43 如果善的意志或恶的意志可以改变世界,那么它只能改变世界的界限,而不能改变事实,即不能改变可以用语言表达的东西。

 

简言之,其结果必然是世界整个地变成另外的样子。也就是说,世界必定作为整体而消长。

 

幸福者的世界不同于不幸者的世界。

 

 

 

6.431 同样地,在死这一点上,世界不是改变,而是终止。

 

 

 

6.4311死不是生活里的一件事情:人是没有经历过死的。

 

如果我们不把永恒性理解为时间的无限延续,而是理解为无时间性,那么此刻活着的人,也就永恒地活着。

 

人生之为无穷,正如视域之为无限。

 

 

 

6.4312不仅人的灵魂在时间上的不灭,或者说它在死后的永存,是没有保证的;而且在任何情形下,这个假定都达不到人们所不断追求的目的。难道由于我的永生就能把一些谜解开吗?这种永恒的人生难道不象我们此刻的人生一样是一个谜吗?时空之中的人生之谜的解答,在于时空之外。

 

(所要解答的肯定不是自然科学的命题。)

 

 

 

6.432 世界上的事物是怎样的,对于更高者完全无关紧要。上帝不在世上现身。

 

 

 

6.4321事实都只算是提出问题,而非问题的解答。

 

 

 

6.44 世界是怎样的这一点并不神秘,而世界存在着,这一点是神秘的。

 

 

 

6.45 用永恒观点来观察世界,就是把它看作一个整体棗一个有界限的整体。

 

把世界作为一个有限整体的感觉是神秘的。

 

 

 

6.5 若解答不可说,其问题也就不可说。

 

谜是不存在的。

 

当一个问题可以提出,它也就可能得到解答。

 

 

 

6.51 怀疑论不是不可反驳的,而是因为它试图在不能提出问题的地方产生怀疑,所以显然是无意义的。

 

因为怀疑只能存在于有一定问题的地方,一定问题只能存在于有一定解答的地方,而解答则只能存在于有某种东西可说的地方。

 

 

 

6.52 我们觉得,即使一切可能的科学问题都已得到解答,也还完全没有触及到人生问题。当然那时不再有问题留下来,而这也正就是解答。

 

 

 

6.521 人生问题的解答在于这个问题的清除。

 

(有些人在长期怀疑之后发现他们明白了人生的意义,但是又不能说出来这意义究竟是什么,不就是这个道理吗?)

 

 

 

6.522 确实有不可说的东西。它们显示自己,它们是神秘的东西。

 

 

 

6.53 哲学中正确的方法是:除了可说的东西,即自然科学的命题棗也就是与哲学无关的某种东西之外,就不再说什么,而且一旦有人想说某种形而上学的东西时,立刻就向他指明,他没有给他的命题中的某些记号以指谓。虽然有人会不满意这种方法棗他不觉得我们是在教他哲学棗但是这却是唯一严格正确的方法。

 

 

 

6.54 我的命题应当是以如下方式来起阐明作用的:任何理解我的人,当他用这些命题为梯级而超越了它们时,就会终于认识到它们是无意义的。(可以说,在登上高处之后他必须把梯子扔掉。)

 

 

 

7 对于不可说的东西我们必须保持沉默。

 

 

 

 

 

Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

 

Ludwig Wittgenstein

 

 

 

6.4 All propositions are of equal value.

 

 

 

6.41 The sense of the world must lie outside the world. In the world everything is as it is, and everything happens as it does happen: in it no value exists ---and if it did exist, it would have no value.

 

If there is any value that does have value, it must lie outside the whole sphere of what happens and is the case. For all that happens and is the case is accidental.

 

What makes it non-accidental cannot lie within the world, since if it did it would itself be accidental.

 

It must lie outside the world.

 

 

 

6.42 So too it is impossible for there to be propositions of ethics.

 

Propositions can express nothing that is higher.

 

 

 

6.421 It is clear that ethics cannot be put into words.

 

Ethics is transcendental.

 

(Ethics and aesthetics are one and the same.)

 

 

 

6.422 When an ethical law of the form, Thou shalt …, is laid down, ones first thought is, Andwhat if I do not do it? It is clear, however, that ethics has nothing to do with punishment and reward in the usual sense of the terms. So our question about the consequences of an action must be unimportant. ----At least those consequences should not be events. For there must be something right about the question we posed. There must indeed be some kind of ethical reward and ethical punishment, but they must reside in the action itself.

 

(And it is also clear that the reward must be something pleasant and the punishment something unpleasant.)

 

 

 

6.423 It is impossible to speak about the will in so far as it is the subject of ethical attributes.

 

And the will as a phenomenon is of interest only to psychology.

 

 

 

6.43 If the good or bad exercise of the will does alter the world, it can alter only the limits of the world, not the facts --- not what can be expressed by means of language。

 

In short the effect must be that it becomes an altogether different world, It must, so to speak, wax and wane as a whole.

 

The world of the happy man is a different one from that of the unhappy man.

 

 

 

6.431 So too at death the world does not alter, but comes to an end.

 

 

 

6.4311 Death is not an event in life: we do not live to experience death.

 

If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present.

 

Our life has no end in just the way in which our visual field has no limits.

 

 

 

6.4312 Not only is there no guarantee of the temporal immortality of the human soul, that is to say of its eternal survival after death; but, in any case, this assumption completely fails to accomplish the purpose fro which it has always been intended. Or is some riddle solved by my surviving forever?

 

The solution of the riddle of life in space and time lies outside space and time.

 

(It is certainly not the solution of any problems of natural science that is required.)

 

 

 

6.432 How things are in the world is a matter of complete indifference for what is higher. God does not reveal himself in the world.

 

 

 

6.4321 The facts all contribute only to setting the problem not to its solution.

 

 

 

6.44 It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists.

 

 

 

6.45 To view the world sub specie aeterni is to view it as a whole --- a limited whole.

 

Feeling the world as a limited whole --- it is this that is mystical.

 

 

 

6.5 When the answer cannot be put into words, neither can the question be put into words.

 

The riddle does not exist.

 

If a question can be framed at all, it is also possible to answer it.

 

 

 

6.51 Skepticism is not irrefutable, but obviously nonsensical, when it tries to raise doubts where no questions can be asked.

 

For doubt can exist only where a question exists, a question not only where an answer exists, and an answer only something can be said.

 

 

 

6.52 We feel that even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, the problems of life remain completely untouched. Of course there are then no questions left, and this itself is the answer.

 

 

 

6.521 The solution of the problem of life is seen in the vanishing of the problem.

 

(Is not this the reason why those who have found after a long period of doubt that the sense of life became clear to them have then been unable to say what constituted that sense?)

 

 

 

6.522 There are, indeed, things that cannot be put into words. They make themselves manifest.

 

They are what is mystical.

 

 

 

6.53 The correct method in philosophy would really be the following: to say nothing except what can be said, i.e. propositions of natural science i.e. something that had nothing to do with philosophy and then, whenever someone else wanted to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had failed to give a meaning to certain signs in his propositions.

 

Although it would not be satisfying to the other person - he would not have the feeling that we

 

were teaching him philosophy -- this method would be the only strictly correct one.

 

 

 

6.54 My propositions serve as elucidations in the following way: anyone who understands me eventually recognizes them as nonsensical, when he has used them as steps to climb up beyond them. (He must, so to speak, throw away the ladder after he has climbed up it.)

 

 

 

7 What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.