ludwig wittgenstein.doc

8/13/2019 Ludwig Wittgenstein.doc

1/64

On Certainty Wittgenstein

Preface

On Certainty

(Uber Gewissheit)

Ludwig Wittgenstein

Born: 2 !"ri# $%%& in 'ienna !ustria ied: 2& !"ri# $&*$ in Ca+bridge

,ng#and ed- G- ,- .- !nsco+be and G- /- 0on Wright 1rans#ated by enis Pau#

and G- ,- .- !nsco+be Basi# B#acwe## O3ford $&&4$&5*

Ludwig Wittgenstein On Certainty (Uber Gewissheit)

ed- G- ,- .- !nsco+be and G- /- 0on Wright 1rans#ated by enis Pau# and G- ,-

.- !nsco+be Basi# B#acwe## O3ford $&&4$&5*

Preface

What we "ub#ish here be#ongs to the #ast year and a ha#f of Wittgenstein6s #ife- 7n

the +idd#e of $&8& he 0isited the United 9tates at the in0itation of or+an

.a#co#+ staying at .a#co#+6s house in 7thaca- .a#co#+ acted as a goad to his

interest in .oore6s 6defence of co++on sense6 that is to say his c#ai+ to now anu+ber of "ro"ositions for sure such as ;/ere is one hand and here is another;

and ;1he earth e3isted for a #ong ti+e before +y birth; and ;7 ha0e ne0er been

far fro+ the earth6s surface;- 1he first of these co+es in .oore6s 6Proof of the

,3terna# Wor#d6- 1he two others are in his 6efence of Co++on 9ense6 to ?ebruary

$&*$- 7 (G- ,- .- !-) a+ under the i+"ression that he had written the+ in 'ienna

where he stayed fro+ the "re0ious Christ+as unti# .arch< but 7 cannot now reca##

the basis of this i+"ression- 1he rest is in s+a## noteboos containing dates- ;oubting the e3istence of the e3terna# wor#d; does not +ean for e3a+"#e

doubting the e3istence of a "#anet which #ater obser0ations "ro0ed to e3ist- 4 Or

does .oore want to say that nowing that here is his hand is different in ind fro+nowing the e3istence of the "#anet 9aturnA Otherwise it wou#d be "ossib#e to "oint

out the disco0ery of the "#anet 9aturn to the doubters and say that its e3istence has

been "ro0ed and hence the e3istence of the e3terna# wor#d as we##-

2$- .oore6s 0iew rea##y co+es down to this: the conce"t 6now6 is ana#ogous to the

conce"ts 6be#ie0e6 6sur+ise6 6doubt6 6be con0inced6 in that the state+ent ;7

now---; can6t be a +istae- !nd if that is so then there can be an inference fro+

such an utterance to the truth of an assertion- !nd here the for+ ;7 thought 7

new; is being o0er#ooed- 4 But if this #atter is inad+issib#e then a +istae in the

assertion +ust be #ogica##y i+"ossib#e too- !nd anyone who is acuainted with the

#anguage4ga+e +ust rea#iIe this 4 an assurance fro+ a re#iab#e +an that he nowscannot contribute anything-

22- 7t wou#d sure#y be re+arab#e if we had to be#ie0e the re#iab#e "erson who says

;7 can6t be wrong;< or who says ;7 a+ not wrong;-

2@- 7f 7 don6t now whether so+eone has two hands (say whether they ha0e been

a+"utated or not) 7 sha## be#ie0e his assurance that he has two hands if he is

trustworthy- !nd if he says he nows it that can on#y signify to +e that he has

been ab#e to +ae sure and hence that his ar+s are e- g- not sti## concea#ed by

co0erings and bandages etc- etc- .y be#ie0ing the trustworthy +an ste+s fro+ +y

ad+itting that it is "ossib#e for hi+ to +ae sure- But so+eone who says that

"erha"s there are no "hysica# obHects +aes no such ad+ission-

28- 1he idea#ist6s uestion wou#d be so+ething #ie: ;What right ha0e 7 not to

doubt the e3istence of +y handsA; (!nd to that the answer can6t be: 7 now that

they e3ist-) But so+eone who ass such a uestion is o0er#ooing the fact that a

doubt about e3istence on#y wors in a #anguage4ga+e- /ence that we shou#d first

ha0e to as: what wou#d such a doubt be #ieA and don6t understand this straight

off-

2*- One +ay be wrong e0en about ;there being a hand here;- On#y in "articu#arcircu+stances is it i+"ossib#e- 4 ;,0en in a ca#cu#ation one can be wrong 4 on#y in

certain circu+stances one can6t-;

2- But can it be seen fro+ a ru#e what circu+stances #ogica##y e3c#ude a +istae

in the e+"#oy+ent of ru#es of ca#cu#ationA What use is a ru#e to us hereA .ightn6t

we (in turn) go wrong in a""#ying itA

25- 7f howe0er one wanted to gi0e so+ething #ie a ru#e here then it wou#d

contain the e3"ression ;in nor+a# circu+stances;- !nd we recogniIe nor+a#

circu+stances but cannot "recise#y describe the+- !t +ost we can describe a

range of abnor+a# ones-


5/64

2%- What is 6#earning a ru#e6A 4 1his- What is 6+aing a +istae in a""#ying it6A 4

1his- !nd what is "ointed to here is so+ething indeter+inate-

2&- Practice in the use of the ru#e a#so shows what is a +istae in its e+"#oy+ent-

@>- When so+eone has +ade sure of so+ething he says: ;Ees the ca#cu#ation isright; but he did not infer that fro+ his condition of certainty- One does not infer

how things are fro+ one6s own certainty- Certainty is as it were a tone of 0oice in

which one dec#ares how things are but one does not infer fro+ the tone of 0oice

that one is Hustified-

@$- 1he "ro"ositions which one co+es bac to again and again as if bewitched 4

these 7 shou#d #ie to e3"unge fro+ "hi#oso"hica# #anguage-

@2- 7t6s not a +atter of .oore6s nowing that there6s a hand there but rather we

shou#d not understand hi+ if he were to say ;Of course 7 +ay be wrong about

this-; We shou#d as ;What is it #ie to +ae such a +istae as thatA; 4 e- g-what6s it #ie to disco0er that it was a +istaeA

@@- 1hus we e3"unge the sentences that don6t get us any further-

@8- 7f so+eone is taught to ca#cu#ate is he a#so taught that he can re#y on a

ca#cu#ation of his teacher6sA But these e3"#anations +ust after a## so+eti+e co+e

to an end- Wi## he a#so be taught that he can trust his senses 4 since he is indeed

to#d in +any cases that in such and such a s"ecia# case you cannot trust the+A 4

Ju#e and e3ce"tion-

@*- But can6t it be i+agined that there shou#d be no "hysica# obHectsA 7 don6t now-

!nd yet ;1here are "hysica# obHects; is nonsense- 7s it su""osed to be an e+"irica#

"ro"ositionA 4 !nd is this an e+"irica# "ro"osition: ;1here see+ to be "hysica#

obHects;A

@- ;! is a "hysica# obHect; is a "iece of instruction which we gi0e on#y to so+eone

who doesn6t yet understand either what ;!; +eans or what ;"hysica# obHect;

+eans- 1hus it is instruction about the use of words and ;"hysica# obHect; is a

#ogica# conce"t- (Lie co#our uantity---) !nd that is why no such "ro"osition as:

;1here are "hysica# obHects; can be for+u#ated- Eet we encounter such

unsuccessfu# shots at e0ery turn-

@5- But is it adeuate to answer to the sce"ticis+ of the idea#ist or the assurances

of the rea#ist to say that ;1here are "hysica# obHects; is nonsenseA ?or the+ after

a## it is not nonsense- 7t wou#d howe0er be an answer to say: this assertion or its

o""osite is a +isfiring atte+"t to e3"ress what can6t be e3"ressed #ie that- !nd

that it does +isfire can be shown< but that isn6t the end of the +atter- We need to

rea#iIe that what "resents itse#f to us as the first e3"ression of a difficu#ty or of its

so#ution +ay as yet not be correct#y e3"ressed at a##- Kust as one who has a Hust

censure of a "icture to +ae wi## often at first offer the censure where it does not

be#ong and an in0estigation is needed in order to find the right "oint of attac for

the critic-


6/64

@%- now#edge in +athe+atics: /ere one has to ee" on re+inding onese#f of the

uni+"ortance of the 6inner "rocess6 or 6state6 and as ;Why shou#d it be

i+"ortantA What does it +atter to +eA; What is interesting is how we use

+athe+atica# "ro"ositions-

@&- 1his is how ca#cu#ation is done in such circu+stances a ca#cu#ation is treated asabso#ute#y re#iab#e as certain#y correct-

8>- U"on ;7 now that there is +y hand; there +ay fo##ow the uestion ;/ow do

you nowA; and the answer to that "resu""oses that this can be nown in that

way- 9o instead of ;7 now that here is +y hand; one +ight say ;/ere is +y

hand; and then add how one nows-

8$- ;7 now where 7 a+ fee#ing "ain; ;7 now that 7 fee# it here; is as wrong as ;7

now that 7 a+ in "ain;- But ;7 now where you touched +y ar+; is right-

82- One can say ;/e be#ie0es it but it isn6t so; but not ;/e nows it but it isn6tso;- oes this ste+ fro+ the difference between the +enta# states of be#ief and

now#edgeA o- 4 One +ay for e3a+"#e ca## ;+enta# state; what is e3"ressed by

tone of 0oice in s"eaing by gestures etc- 7t wou#d thus be "ossib#e to s"ea of a

+enta# state of con0iction and that +ay be the sa+e whether it is now#edge or

fa#se be#ief- 1o thin that different states +ust corres"ond to the words ;be#ie0e;

and ;now; wou#d be as if one be#ie0ed that different "eo"#e had to corres"ond to

the word ;7; and the na+e ;Ludwig; because the conce"ts are different-

8@- What sort of "ro"osition is this: ;We cannot ha0e +isca#cu#ated in

$23$2$88;A 7t +ust sure#y be a "ro"osition of #ogic- 4 But now is it not the sa+e

or doesn6t it co+e to the sa+e as the state+ent

$23$2$88A

88- 7f you de+and a ru#e fro+ which it fo##ows that there can6t ha0e been a

+isca#cu#ation here the answer is that we did not #earn this through a ru#e but by

#earning to ca#cu#ate-

8*- We got to now the nature of ca#cu#ating by #earning to ca#cu#ate-

8- But then can6t it be described how we satisfy ourse#0es of the re#iabi#ity of a

ca#cu#ationA O yes Eet no ru#e e+erges when we do so- 4 But the +ost i+"ortantthing is: 1he ru#e is not needed- othing is #acing- We do ca#cu#ate according to a

ru#e and that is enough-

85- 1his is how one ca#cu#ates- Ca#cu#ating is this- What we #earn at schoo# for

e3a+"#e- ?orget this transcendent certainty which is connected with your conce"t

of s"irit-

8%- /owe0er out of a host of ca#cu#ations certain ones +ight be designated as

re#iab#e once for a## others as not yet fi3ed- !nd now is this a #ogica# distinctionA

8&- But re+e+ber: e0en when the ca#cu#ation is so+ething fi3ed for +e this is on#ya decision for a "ractica# "ur"ose-


7/64

*>- When does one say 7 now that --- 3 --- ----A When one has checed the

ca#cu#ation-

*$- What sort of "ro"osition is: ;What cou#d a +istae here be #ieA; 7t wou#d

ha0e to be a #ogica# "ro"osition- But is it a #ogic that is not used because what itte##s us is not taught by +eans of "ro"ositions- 4 7t is a #ogica# "ro"osition< for it

does describe the conce"tua# (#inguistic) situation-

*2- 1his situation is thus not the sa+e for a "ro"osition #ie ;!t this distance fro+

the sun there is a "#anet; and ;/ere is a hand; (na+e#y +y own hand)- 1he

second can6t be ca##ed a hy"othesis- But there isn6t a shar" boundary #ine between

the+-

*@- 9o one +ight grant that .oore was right if he is inter"reted #ie this: a

"ro"osition saying that here is a "hysica# obHect +ay ha0e the sa+e #ogica# status

as one saying that here is a red "atch-

*8- ?or it is not true that a +istae +ere#y gets +ore and +ore i+"robab#e as we

"ass fro+ the "#anet to +y own hand- o: at so+e "oint it has ceased to be

concei0ab#e- 1his is a#ready suggested by the fo##owing: if it were not so it wou#d

a#so be concei0ab#e that we shou#d be wrong in e0ery state+ent about "hysica#

obHects< that any we e0er +ae are +istaen-

**- 9o is the hy"othesis "ossib#e that a## the things around us don6t e3istA Wou#d

that not be #ie the hy"othesis of our ha0ing +isca#cu#ated in a## our ca#cu#ationsA

*- When one says: ;Perha"s this "#anet doesn6t e3ist and the #ight4"heno+enon

arises in so+e other way; then after a## one needs an e3a+"#e of an obHect which

does e3ist- 1his doesn6t e3ist 4 as for e3a+"#e does--- Or are we to say that

certainty is +ere#y a constructed "oint to which so+e things a""ro3i+ate +ore

so+e #ess c#ose#yA o- oubt gradua##y #oses its sense- 1his #anguage4ga+e Hust is

#ie that- !nd e0erything descri"ti0e of a #anguage4ga+e is "art of #ogic-

*5- ow +ight not ;7 now 7 a+ not Hust sur+ising that here is +y hand; be

concei0ed as a "ro"osition of gra++arA /ence not te+"ora##y- 4 But in that case

isn6t it #ie this one: ;7 now 7 a+ not Hust sur+ising that 7 a+ seeing red;A !nd

isn6t the conseuence ;9o there are "hysica# obHects; #ie: ;9o there are co#ours;A

*%- 7f ;7 now etc; is concei0ed as a gra++atica# "ro"osition of course the ;7;

cannot be i+"ortant- !nd it "ro"er#y +eans ;1here is no such thing as a doubt in

this case; or ;1he e3"ression 67 do not now6 +aes no sense in this case;- !nd of

course it fo##ows fro+ this that ;7 now; +aes no sense either-

*&- ;7 now; is here a #ogica# insight- On#y rea#is+ can6t be "ro0ed by +eans of it-

>- 7t is wrong to say that the 6hy"othesis6 that this is a bit of "a"er wou#d be

confir+ed or disconfir+ed by #ater e3"erience and that in ;7 now that this is a

bit of "a"er; the ;7 now; either re#ates to such an hy"othesis or to a #ogica#deter+ination-


8/64

$- --- ! +eaning of a word is a ind of e+"#oy+ent of it- ?or it is what we #earn

when the word is incor"orated into our #anguage-

2- 1hat is why there e3ists a corres"ondence between the conce"ts 6ru#e6 and

6+eaning6-

@- 7f we i+agine the facts otherwise than as they are certain #anguage4ga+es #ose

so+e of their i+"ortance whi#e others beco+e i+"ortant- !nd in this way there is

an a#teration 4 a gradua# one 4 in the use of the 0ocabu#ary of a #anguage-

8- Co+"are the +eaning of a word with the 6function6 of an officia#- !nd

6different +eanings6 with 6different functions6-

*- When #anguage4ga+es change then there is a change in conce"ts and with the

conce"ts the +eanings of words change- MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

- 7 +ae assertions about rea#ity assertions which ha0e different degrees of

assurance- /ow does the degree of assurance co+e outA What conseuences has itA

We +ay be dea#ing for e3a+"#e with the certainty of +e+ory or again of

"erce"tion- 7 +ay be sure of so+ething but sti## now what test +ight con0ince +e

of error- 7 a+ e- g- uite sure of the date of a batt#e but if 7 shou#d find a different

date in a recogniIed wor of history 7 shou#d a#ter +y o"inion and this wou#d not

+ean 7 #ost a## faith in Hudging-

5- Cou#d we i+agine a +an who ee"s on +aing +istaes where we regard a

+istae as ru#ed out and in fact ne0er encounter oneA ,- g- he says he #i0es in such

and such a "#ace is so and so o#d co+es fro+ such and such a city and he s"eas

with the sa+e certainty (gi0ing a## the toens of it) as 7 do but he is wrong- But

what is his re#ation to this errorA What a+ 7 to su""oseA

%- 1he uestion is: what is the #ogician to say hereA

&- 7 shou#d #ie to say: ;7f 7 a+ wrong about this 7 ha0e no guarantee that

anything 7 say is true-; But others won6t say that about +e nor wi## 7 say it about

other "eo"#e-

5>- ?or +onths 7 ha0e #i0ed at address ! 7 ha0e read the na+e of the street andthe nu+ber of the house count#ess ti+es ha0e recei0ed count#ess #etters here and

gi0en count#ess "eo"#e the address- 7f 7 a+ wrong about it the +istae is hard#y

#ess that if 7 were (wrong#y) to be#ie0e 7 was writing Chinese and not Ger+an-

5$- 7f +y friend were to i+agine one day that he had been #i0ing for a #ong ti+e

"ast in such and such a "#ace etc- etc- 7 shou#d not ca## this a +istae but rather a

+enta# disturbance "erha"s a transient one-

52- ot e0ery fa#se be#ief of this sort is a +istae-

5@- But what is the difference between +istae and +enta# disturbanceA Or what isthe difference between +y treating it as a +istae and +y treating it as +enta#


9/64

disturbanceA

58- Can we say: a +istae doesn6t on#y ha0e a cause it a#so has a groundA 7- e-

rough#y: when so+eone +aes a +istae this can be fitted into what he nows

aright-

5*- Wou#d this be correct: 7f 7 +ere#y be#ie0ed wrong#y that there is a tab#e here in

front of +e this +ight sti## be a +istae< but if 7 be#ie0e wrong#y that 7 ha0e seen

this tab#e or one #ie it e0ery day for se0era# +onths "ast and ha0e regu#ar#y used

it that isn6t a +istaeA

5- atura##y +y ai+ +ust be to gi0e the state+ents that one wou#d #ie to +ae

here but cannot +ae significant#y-

55- Perha"s 7 sha## do a +u#ti"#ication twice to +ae sure or "erha"s get so+eone

e#se to wor it o0er- But sha## 7 wor it o0er again twenty ti+es or get twenty

"eo"#e to go o0er itA !nd is that so+e sort of neg#igenceA Wou#d the certaintyrea##y be greater for being checed twenty ti+esA

5%- !nd can 7 gi0e a reason why it isn6tA

5&- 1hat 7 a+ a +an and not a wo+an can be 0erified but if 7 were to say 7 was a

wo+an and then tried to e3"#ain the error by saying 7 hadn6t checed the

state+ent the e3"#anation wou#d not be acce"ted-

%>- 1he truth of +y state+ents is the test of +y understanding of these state+ents-

%$- 1hat is to say: if 7 +ae certain fa#se state+ents it beco+es uncertain whether

7 understand the+-

%2- What counts as an adeuate test of a state+ent be#ongs to #ogic- 7t be#ongs to

the descri"tion of the #anguage4ga+e-

%@- 1he truth of certain e+"irica# "ro"ositions be#ongs to our fra+e of reference-

%8- .oore says he nows that the earth e3isted #ong before his birth- !nd "ut #ie

that it see+s to be a "ersona# state+ent about hi+ e0en if it is in addition a

state+ent about the "hysica# wor#d- ow it is "hi#oso"hica##y uninterestingwhether .oore nows this or that but it is interesting that and how it can be

nown- 7f .oore had infor+ed us that he new the distance se"arating certain

stars we +ight conc#ude fro+ that that he had +ade so+e s"ecia# in0estigations

and we sha## want to now what these were- But .oore chooses "recise#y a case in

which we a## see+ to now the sa+e as he and without being ab#e to say how- 7

be#ie0e e- g- that 7 now as +uch about this +atter (the e3istence of the earth) as

.oore does and if he nows that it is as he says then 7 now it too- ?or it isn6t

either as if he had arri0ed at this "ro"osition by "ursuing so+e #ine of thought

which whi#e it is o"en to +e 7 ha0e not in fact "ursued-

%*- !nd what goes into so+eone6s nowing thisA now#edge of history sayA /e+ust now what it +eans to say: the earth has a#ready e3isted for such and such a


10/64

#ength of ti+e- ?or not any inte##igent adu#t +ust now that- We see +en bui#ding

and de+o#ishing houses and are #ed to as:;/ow #ong has this house been hereA;

But how does one co+e on the idea of asing this about a +ountain for e3a+"#eA

!nd ha0e a## +en the notion of the earth as a body which +ay co+e into being

and "ass awayA Why shou#dn6t 7 thin of the earth as f#at but e3tending without

end in e0ery direction (inc#uding de"th)A But in that case one +ight sti## say ;7now that this +ountain e3isted #ong before +y birth-; 4 But su""ose 7 +et a +an

who didn6t be#ie0e thatA

%- 9u""ose 7 re"#aced .oore6s ;7 now; by ;7 a+ of the unshaeab#e

con0iction;A

%5- Can6t an assertoric sentence which was ca"ab#e of functioning as an

hy"othesis a#so be used as a foundation for research and actionA 7- e- can6t it

si+"#y be iso#ated fro+ doubt though not according to any e3"#icit ru#eA 7t si+"#y

gets assu+ed as a truis+ ne0er ca##ed in uestion "erha"s not e0en e0er

for+u#ated-

%%- 7t +ay be for e3a+"#e that a## enuiry on our "art is set so as to e3e+"t certain

"ro"ositions fro+ doubt if they were e0er for+u#ated- 1hey #ie a"art fro+ the

route tra0e##ed by enuiry-

%&- One wou#d #ie to say: ;,0erything s"eas for and nothing against the earth6s

ha0ing e3isted #ong before---; Eet +ight 7 not be#ie0e the contrary after a##A But

the uestion is: What wou#d the "ractica# effects of this be#ief beA 4 Perha"s

so+eone says: ;1hat6s not the "oint- ! be#ief is what it is whether it has any

"ractica# effects or not-; One thins: 7t is the sa+e adHust+ent of the hu+an +ind

anyway-

&>- ;7 now; has a "ri+iti0e +eaning si+i#ar to and re#ated to ;7 see; (;wissen;

;0idere;)- !nd ;7 new he was in the roo+ but he wasn6t in the roo+; is #ie ;7

saw hi+ in the roo+ but he wasn6t there;- ;7 now; is su""osed to e3"ress a

re#ation not between +e and the sense of a "ro"osition (#ie ;7 be#ie0e;) but

between +e and a fact- 9o that the fact is taen into +y consciousness- (/ere is the

reason why one wants to say that nothing that goes on in the outer wor#d is rea##y

nown but on#y what ha""ens in the do+ain of what are ca##ed sense4data-) 1his

wou#d gi0e us a "icture of nowing as the "erce"tion of an outer e0ent through

0isua# rays which "roHect it as it is into the eye and the consciousness- On#y thenthe uestion at once arises whether one can be certain of this "roHection- !nd this

"icture does indeed show how our i+agination "resents now#edge but not what

#ies at the botto+ of this "resentation-

&$- 7f .oore says he nows the earth e3isted etc- +ost of us wi## grant hi+ that it

has e3isted a## that ti+e and a#so be#ie0e hi+ when he says he is con0inced of it-

But has he a#so got the right ground for this con0ictionA ?or if not then after a## he

doesn6t now (Jusse##)-

&2- /owe0er we can as: .ay so+eone ha0e te##ing grounds for be#ie0ing that the

earth has on#y e3isted for a short ti+e say since his own birthA 4 9u""ose he hada#ways been to#d that 4 wou#d he ha0e any good reason to doubt itA .en ha0e


11/64

be#ie0ed that they cou#d +ae the rain< why shou#d not a ing be brought u" in the

be#ief that the wor#d began with hi+A !nd if .oore and this ing were to +eet and

discuss cou#d .oore rea##y "ro0e his be#ief to be the right oneA 7 do not say that

.oore cou#d not con0ert the ing to his 0iew but it wou#d be a con0ersion of a

s"ecia# ind< the ing wou#d be brought to #oo at the wor#d in a different way-

Je+e+ber that one is so+eti+es con0inced of the correctness of a 0iew by itssi+"#icity or sy++etry i- e- these are what induce one to go o0er to this "oint of

0iew- One then si+"#y says so+ething #ie: ;1hat6s how it +ust be-;

&@- 1he "ro"ositions "resenting what .oore 6nows6 are a## of such a ind that it is

difficu#t to i+agine why anyone shou#d be#ie0e the contrary- ,- g- the "ro"osition

that .oore has s"ent his who#e #ife in c#ose "ro3i+ity to the earth- 4 Once +ore 7

can s"ea of +yse#f here instead of s"eaing of .oore- What cou#d induce +e to

be#ie0e the o""ositeA ,ither a +e+ory or ha0ing been to#d- 4 ,0erything that 7

ha0e seen or heard gi0es +e the con0iction that no +an has e0er been far fro+ the

earth- othing in +y "icture of the wor#d s"eas in fa0our of the o""osite-

&8- But 7 did not get +y "icture of the wor#d by satisfying +yse#f of its correctness>- 1he truths which .oore says he nows are such as rough#y s"eaing a## of

us now if he nows the+-

$>$- 9uch a "ro"osition +ight be e- g- ;.y body has ne0er disa""eared and

rea""eared again after an inter0a#-;

$>2- .ight 7 not be#ie0e that once without nowing it "erha"s is a state of


12/64

unconsciousness 7 was taen far away fro+ the earth 4 that other "eo"#e e0en

now this but do not +ention it to +eA But this wou#d not fit into the rest of +y

con0ictions at a##- ot that 7 cou#d describe the syste+ of these con0ictions- Eet +y

con0ictions do for+ a syste+ a structure-

$>@- !nd now if 7 were to say ;7t is +y unshaeab#e con0iction that etc-; this+eans in the "resent case too that 7 ha0e not conscious#y arri0ed at the con0iction

by fo##owing a "articu#ar #ine of thought but that it is anchored in a## +y uestions

and answers so anchored that 7 cannot touch it-

$>8- 7 a+ for e3a+"#e a#so con0inced that the sun is not a ho#e in the 0au#t of

hea0en-

$>*- !## testing a## confir+ation and disconfir+ation of a hy"othesis taes "#ace

a#ready within a syste+- !nd this syste+ is not a +ore or #ess arbitrary and

doubtfu# "oint of de"arture for a## our argu+ents: no it be#ongs to the essence of

what we ca## an argu+ent- 1he syste+ is not so +uch the "oint of de"arture as thee#e+ent in which argu+ents ha0e their #ife-

$>- 9u""ose so+e adu#t had to#d a chi#d that he had been on the +oon- 1he chi#d

te##s +e the story and 7 say it was on#y a Hoe the +an hadn6t been on the +oon5- 7sn6t this a#together #ie the way one can instruct a chi#d to be#ie0e in a God

or that none e3ists and it wi## according#y be ab#e to "roduce a""arent#y te##ing

grounds for the one or the otherA

$>%- ;But is there then no obHecti0e truthA 7sn6t it true or fa#se that so+eone has

been on the +oonA; 7f we are thining within our syste+ then it is certain that no

one has e0er been on the +oon- ot +ere#y is nothing of the sort e0er serious#y

re"orted to us by reasonab#e "eo"#e but our who#e syste+ of "hysics forbids us tobe#ie0e it- ?or this de+ands answers to the uestions ;/ow did he o0erco+e the

force of gra0ityA; ;/ow cou#d he #i0e without an at+os"hereA; and a thousand

others which cou#d not be answered- But su""ose that instead of a## these answers

we +et the re"#y: ;We don6t now how one gets to the +oon but those who get

there now at once that they are there< and e0en you can6t e3"#ain e0erything-;

We shou#d fee# ourse#0es inte##ectua##y 0ery distant fro+ so+eone who said this-

$>&- ;!n e+"irica# "ro"osition can be tested; (we say)- But howA and through

whatA

$$>- What counts as its testA 4 ;But is this an adeuate testA !nd if so +ust it notbe recogniIab#e as such in #ogicA; 4 !s if gi0ing grounds did not co+e to an end


13/64

so+eti+e- But the end is not an ungrounded "resu""osition: it is an ungrounded

way of acting-

$$$- ;7 now that 7 ha0e ne0er been on the +oon-; 1hat sounds different in the

circu+stances which actua##y ho#d to the way it wou#d sound if a good +any +en

had been on the +oon and so+e "erha"s without nowing it- 7n this case onecou#d gi0e grounds for this now#edge- 7s there not a re#ationshi" here si+i#ar to

that between the genera# ru#e of +u#ti"#ying and "articu#ar +u#ti"#ications that

ha0e been carried outA 7 want to say: +y not ha0ing been on the +oon is as sure a

thing for +e as any grounds 7 cou#d gi0e for it-

$$2- !nd isn6t that what .oore wants to say when he says he nows a## these

thingsA 4 But is his nowing it rea##y what is in uestion and not rather that so+e

of these "ro"ositions +ust be so#id for usA

$$@- When so+eone is trying to teach us +athe+atics he wi## not begin by

assuring us that he nows that aNbbNa-

$$8- 7f you are not certain of any fact you cannot be certain of the +eaning of your

words either-

$$*- 7f you tried to doubt e0erything you wou#d not get as far as doubting

anything- 1he ga+e of doubting itse#f "resu""oses certainty-

$$- 7nstead of ;7 now---; cou#dn6t .oore ha0e said: ;7t stands fast for +e

that---;A !nd further: ;7t stands fast for +e and +any others---;

$$5- Why is it not "ossib#e for +e to doubt that 7 ha0e ne0er been on the +oonA

!nd how cou#d 7 try to doubt itA ?irst and fore+ost the su""osition that "erha"s 7

ha0e been there wou#d strie +e as id#e- othing wou#d fo##ow fro+ it nothing be

e3"#ained by it- 7t wou#d not tie in with anything in +y #ife- When 7 say ;othing

s"eas for e0erything against it; this "resu""oses a "rinci"#e of s"eaing for and

against- 1hat is 7 +ust be ab#e to say what wou#d s"ea for it-

$$%- ow wou#d it be correct to say: 9o far no one has o"ened +y su## in order to

see whether there is a brain inside< but e0erything s"eas for and nothing against

its being what they wou#d find thereA

$$&- But can it a#so be said: ,0erything s"eas for and nothing against the tab#e6s

sti## being there when no one sees itA ?or what does s"ea of itA

$2>- But if anyone were to doubt it how wou#d his doubt co+e out in "racticeA

!nd cou#dn6t we "eacefu##y #ea0e hi+ to doubt it since it +aes no difference at

a##A

$2$- Can one say: ;Where there is no doubt there is no now#edge either;A

$22- oesn6t one need grounds for doubtA

$2@- Where0er 7 #oo 7 find no ground for doubting that---


14/64

$28- 7 want to say: We use Hudg+ents as "rinci"#es of Hudg+ent-

$2*- 7f a b#ind +an were to as +e ;/a0e you got two handsA; 7 shou#d not +ae

sure by #ooing- 7f 7 were to ha0e any doubt of it then 7 don6t now why 7 shou#d

trust +y eyes- ?or why shou#dn6t 7 test +y eyes by #ooing to find out whether 7 see+y two handsA What is to be tested by whatA (Who decides what stands fastA) !nd

what does it +ean to say that such and such stands fastA

$2- 7 a+ not +ore certain of the +eaning of +y words that 7 a+ of certain

Hudg+ents- Can 7 doubt that this co#our is ca##ed ;b#ue;A

(.y) doubts for+ a syste+-

$25- ?or how do 7 now that so+eone is in doubtA /ow do 7 now that he uses the

words ;7 doubt it; as 7 doA

$2%- ?ro+ a chi#d u" 7 #earnt to Hudge #ie this- 1his is Hudging-

$2&- 1his is how 7 #earned to Hudge< this 7 got to now as Hudg+ent-

$@>- But isn6t it e3"erience that teaches us to Hudge #ie this that is to say that it is

correct to Hudge #ie thisA But how does e3"erience teach us thenA We +ay deri0e

it fro+ e3"erience but e3"erience does not direct us to deri0e anything fro+

e3"erience- 7f it is the ground for our Hudging #ie this and not Hust the cause sti##

we do not ha0e a ground for seeing this in turn as a ground-

$@$- o e3"erience is not the ground for our ga+e of Hudging- or is its

outstanding success-

$@2- .en ha0e Hudged that a ing can +ae rain< we say this contradicts a##

e3"erience- 1oday they Hudge that aero"#anes and the radio etc- are +eans for the

c#oser contact of "eo"#es and the s"read of cu#ture-

$@@- Under ordinary circu+stances 7 do not satisfy +yse#f that 7 ha0e two hands by

seeing how it #oos- Why notA /as e3"erience shown it to be unnecessaryA Or

(again): /a0e we in so+e way #earnt a uni0ersa# #aw of induction and do we trust

it here tooA 4 But why shou#d we ha0e #earnt one uni0ersa# #aw first and not the

s"ecia# one straight awayA

$@8- !fter "utting a boo in a drawer 7 assu+e it is there un#ess--- ;,3"erience

a#ways "ro0es +e right- 1here is no we## attested case of a boo6s (si+"#y)

disa""earing-; 7t has often ha""ened that a boo has ne0er turned u" again

a#though we thought we new for certain where it was- 4 But e3"erience does rea##y

teach that a boo say does not 0anish away- (,- g- gradua##y e0a"orates-) But is it

this e3"erience with boos etc- that #eads us to assu+e that such a boo has not

0anished awayA We## su""ose we were to find that under "articu#ar no0e#

circu+stances boos did 0anish away- 4 9hou#dn6t we a#ter our assu+"tionA Can

one gi0e the #ie to the effect of e3"erience on our syste+ of assu+"tionA

$@*- But do we not si+"#y fo##ow the "rinci"#e that what has a#ways ha""ened wi##


15/64

ha""en again (or so+ething #ie it)A What does it +ean to fo##ow this "rinci"#eA

o we rea##y introduce it into our reasoningA Or is it +ere#y the natura# #aw which

our inferring a""arent#y fo##owsA 1his #atter it +ay be- 7t is not an ite+ in our

considerations-

$@- When .oore says he nows such and such he is rea##y enu+erating a #ot ofe+"irica# "ro"ositions which we affir+ without s"ecia# testing< "ro"ositions that

is which ha0e a "ecu#iar #ogica# ro#e in the syste+ of our e+"irica# "ro"ositions-

$@5- ,0en if the +ost trustworthy of +en assures +e that he nows things are thus

and so this by itse#f cannot satisfy +e that he does now- On#y that he be#ie0es he

nows- 1hat is why .oore6s assurance that he nows--- does not interest us- 1he

"ro"ositions howe0er which .oore retai#s as e3a+"#es of such nown truths are

indeed interesting- ot because anyone nows their truth or be#ie0es he nows

the+ but because they a## ha0e a si+i#ar ro#e in the syste+ of our e+"irica#

Hudg+ents-

$@%- We don6t for e3a+"#e arri0e at any of the+ as a resu#t of in0estigation- 1here

are e- g- historica# in0estigations and in0estigations into the sha"e and a#so the age

of the earth but not into whether the earth has e3isted during the #ast hundred

years- Of course +any of us ha0e infor+ation about this "eriod fro+ our "arents

and grand"arents< but +aynt6 they be wrongA 4 ;onsense; one wi## say- ;/ow

shou#d a## these "eo"#e be wrongA; 4 But is that an argu+entA 7s it not si+"#y the

reHection of an ideaA !nd "erha"s the deter+ination of a conce"tA ?or if 7 s"ea of

a "ossib#e +istae here this changes the ro#e of ;+istae; and ;truth; in our

#i0es-

$@&- ot on#y ru#es but a#so e3a+"#es are needed for estab#ishing a "ractice- Our

ru#es #ea0e #oo"4ho#es o"en and the "ractice has to s"ea for itse#f-

$8>- We do not #earn the "ractice of +aing e+"irica# Hudg+ents by #earning

ru#es: we are taught Hudg+ents and their conne3ion with other Hudg+ents- !

tota#ity of Hudg+ents is +ade "#ausib#e to us-

$8$- When we first begin to be#ie0e anything what we be#ie0e is not a sing#e

"ro"osition it is a who#e syste+ of "ro"ositions- (Light dawns gradua##y o0er the

who#e-)

$82- 7t is not sing#e a3io+s that strie +e as ob0ious it is a syste+ in which

conseuences and "re+ises gi0e one another +utua# su""ort-

$8@- 7 a+ to#d for e3a+"#e that so+eone c#i+bed this +ountain +any years ago-

o 7 a#ways enuire into the re#iabi#ity of the te##er of this story and whether the

+ountain did e3ist years agoA ! chi#d #earns there are re#iab#e and unre#iab#e

infor+ants +uch #ater than it #earns facts which are to#d it- 7t doesn6t #earn at a##

that that +ountain has e3isted for a #ong ti+e: that is the uestion whether it is so

doesn6t arise at a##- 7t swa##ows this conseuence down so to s"ea together with

what it #earns-

$88- 1he chi#d #earns to be#ie0e a host of things- 7- e- it #earns to act according to


16/64

these be#iefs- Bit by bit there for+s a syste+ of what is be#ie0ed and in that syste+

so+e things stand unshaeab#y fast and so+e are +ore or #ess #iab#e to shift- What

stands fast does so not because it is intrinsica##y ob0ious or con0incing< it is rather

he#d fast by what #ies around it-

$8*- One wants to say ;!## +y e3"eriences show that it is so;- But how do they dothatA ?or that "ro"osition to which they "oint itse#f be#ongs to a "articu#ar

inter"retation of the+- ;1hat 7 regard this "ro"osition as certain#y true a#so

characteriIes +y inter"retation of e3"erience-;

$8- We for+ the "icture of the earth as a ba## f#oating free in s"ace and not

a#tering essentia##y in a hundred years- 7 said ;We for+ the "icture etc-; and this

"icture now he#"s us in the Hudg+ent of 0arious situations- 7 +ay indeed ca#cu#ate

the di+ensions of a bridge so+eti+es ca#cu#ate that here things are +ore in

fa0our of a bridge than a ferry etc- etc- 4 but so+ewhere 7 +ust begin with an

assu+"tion or a decision-

$85- 1he "icture of the earth as a ba## is a good "icture it "ro0es itse#f e0erywhere

it is a#so a si+"#e "icture 4 in short we wor with it without doubting it-

$8%- Why do 7 not satisfy +yse#f that 7 ha0e two feet when 7 want to get u" fro+ a

chairA 1here is no why- 7 si+"#y don6t- 1his is how 7 act-

$8&- .y Hudg+ents the+se#0es characteriIe the way 7 Hudge characteriIe the

nature of Hudg+ent-

$*>- /ow does so+eone Hudge which is his right and which his #eft handA /ow do 7

now that +y Hudg+ent wi## agree with so+eone e#se6sA /ow do 7 now that this

co#our is b#ueA 7f 7 don6t trust +yse#f here why shou#d 7 trust anyone e#se6s

Hudg+entA 7s there a whyA .ust 7 not begin to trust so+ewhereA 1hat is to say:

so+ewhere 7 +ust begin with not4doubting< and that is not so to s"ea hasty but

e3cusab#e: it is "art of Hudging-

$*$- 7 shou#d #ie to say: .oore does not now what he asserts he nows but it

stands fast for hi+ as a#so for +e< regarding it as abso#ute#y so#id is "art of our

+ethod of doubt and enuiry-

$*2- 7 do not e3"#icit#y #earn the "ro"ositions that stand fast for +e- 7 can disco0erthe+ subseuent#y #ie the a3is around which a body rotates- 1his a3is is not fi3ed

in the sense that anything ho#ds it fast but the +o0e+ent around it deter+ines its

i++obi#ity-

$*@- o one e0er taught +e that +y hands don6t disa""ear when 7 a+ not "aying

attention to the+- or can 7 be said to "resu""ose the truth of this "ro"osition in

+y assertions etc- (as if they rested on it) whi#e it on#y gets sense fro+ the rest of

our "rocedure of asserting-

$*8- 1here are cases such that if so+eone gi0es signs of doubt where we do not

doubt we cannot confident#y understand his signs as signs of doubt- 7- e-: if we areto understand his signs of doubt as such he +ay gi0e the+ on#y in "articu#ar cases


17/64

and +ay not gi0e the+ in others-

$**- 7n certain circu+stance a +an cannot +ae a +istae- (;Can; is here used

#ogica##y and the "ro"osition does not +ean that a +an cannot say anything fa#se

in those circu+stances-) 7f .oore were to "ronounce the o""osite of those

"ro"ositions which he dec#ares certain we shou#d not Hust not share his o"inion:we shou#d regard hi+ as de+ented-

$*- 7n order to +ae a +istae a +an +ust a#ready Hudge in confor+ity with

+anind-

$*5- 9u""ose a +an cou#d not re+e+ber whether he had a#ways had fi0e fingers or

two handsA 9hou#d we understand hi+A Cou#d we be sure of understanding hi+A

$*%- Can 7 be +aing a +istae for e3a+"#e in thining that the words of which

this sentence is co+"osed are ,ng#ish words whose +eaning 7 nowA

$*&- !s chi#dren we #earn facts< e- g- that e0ery hu+an being has a brain and we

tae the+ on trust- 7 be#ie0e that there is an is#and !ustra#ia of such4and4such a

sha"e and so on and so on< 7 be#ie0e that 7 had great4grand"arents that the "eo"#e

who ga0e the+se#0es out as +y "arents rea##y were +y "arents etc- 1his be#ief

+ay ne0er ha0e been e3"ressed< e0en the thought that it was so ne0er thought-

$>- 1he chi#d #earns by be#ie0ing the adu#t- oubt co+es after be#ief-

$$- 7 #earned an enor+ous a+ount and acce"ted it on hu+an authority and then

7 found so+e things confir+ed or disconfir+ed by +y own e3"erience-

$2- 7n genera# 7 tae as true what is found in te3t4boos of geogra"hy for

e3a+"#e- WhyA 7 say: !## these facts ha0e been confir+ed a hundred ti+es o0er-

But how do 7 now thatA What is +y e0idence for itA 7 ha0e a wor#d4"icture- 7s it

true or fa#seA !bo0e a## it is the substratu+ of a## +y enuiring and asserting- 1he

"ro"ositions describing it are not a## eua##y subHect to testing-

$@- oes anyone e0er test whether this tab#e re+ains in e3istence when no one is

"aying attention to itA We chec the story of a"o#eon but not whether a## the

re"orts about hi+ are based on sense4 dece"tion forgery and the #ie- ?or

whene0er we test anything we are a#ready "resu""osing so+ething that is nottested- ow a+ 7 to say that the e3"eri+ent which "erha"s 7 +ae in order to test

the truth of a "ro"osition "resu""oses the truth of the "ro"osition that the

a""aratus 7 be#ie0e 7 see is rea##y there (and the #ie)A

$8- oesn6t testing co+e to an endA

$*- One chi#d +ight say to another: ;7 now that the earth is a#ready hundred of

years o#d; and that wou#d +ean: 7 ha0e #earnt it-

$- 1he difficu#ty is to rea#iIe the ground#essness of our be#ie0ing-

$5- 7t is c#ear that our e+"irica# "ro"ositions do not a## ha0e the sa+e status since


18/64

one can #ay down such a "ro"osition and turn it fro+ an e+"irica# "ro"osition into

a nor+ of descri"tion- 1hin of che+ica# in0estigations- La0oisier +aes

e3"eri+ents with substances in his #aboratory and now he conc#udes that this and

that taes "#ace when there is burning- /e does not say that it +ight ha""en

otherwise another ti+e- /e has got ho#d of a definite wor#d4"icture 4 not of course

one that he in0ented: he #earned it as a chi#d- 7 say wor#d4"icture and nothy"othesis because it is the +atter4of4course foundation for his research and as

such a#so does un+entioned-

$%- But now what "art is "#ayed by the "resu""osition that a substance ! a#ways

reacts to a substance B in the sa+e way gi0en the sa+e circu+stancesA Or is that

"art of the definition of a substanceA

$&- One +ight thin that there were "ro"ositions dec#aring that che+istry is

"ossib#e- !nd these wou#d be "ro"ositions of a natura# science- ?or what shou#d

they be su""orted by if not by e3"erienceA

$5>- 7 be#ie0e what "eo"#e trans+it to +e in a certain +anner- 7n this way 7 be#ie0e

geogra"hica# che+ica# historica# facts etc- 1hat is how 7 #earn the sciences- Of

course #earning is based on be#ie0ing- 7f you ha0e #earnt that .ont B#anc is 8>>>

+etres high if you ha0e #ooed it u" on the +a" you say you now it- !nd can it

now be said: we accord credence in this way because it has "ro0ed to "ayA

$5$- ! "rinci"#e ground for .oore to assu+e that he ne0er was on the +oon is that

no one e0er was on the +oon or cou#d co+e there< and this we be#ie0e on grounds

of what we #earn-

$52- Perha"s so+eone says ;1here +ust be so+e basic "rinci"#e on which we

accord credence; but what can such a "rinci"#e acco+"#ishA 7s it +ore than a

natura# #aw of 6taing for true6A

$5@- 7s it +aybe in +y "ower what 7 be#ie0eA or what 7 unshaeab#y be#ie0eA 7

be#ie0e that there is a chair o0er there- Can6t 7 be wrongA But can 7 be#ie0e that 7

a+ wrongA Or can 7 so +uch as bring it under considerationA 4 !nd +ightn6t 7

a#so ho#d fast to +y be#ief whate0er 7 #earned #ater onA But is +y be#ief then

groundedA

$58- 7 act with co+"#ete certainty- But this certainty is +y own-

$5*- ;7 now it; 7 say to so+eone e#se< and here there is a Hustification- But there is

none for +y be#ief-

$5- 7nstead of ;7 now it; one +ay say in so+e cases ;1hat6s how it is 4 re#y u"on

it-; 7n so+e cases howe0er ;7 #earned it years and years ago;< and so+eti+es: ;7

a+ sure it is so-;

$55- What 7 now 7 be#ie0e-

$5%- 1he wrong use +ade by .oore of the "ro"osition ;7 now---; #ies in hisregarding it as an utterance as #itt#e subHect to doubt as ;7 a+ in "ain;- !nd since


19/64

fro+ ;7 now it is so; there fo##ows ;7t is so; then the #atter can6t be doubted

either-

$5&- 7t wou#d be correct to say: ;7 be#ie0e---; has subHecti0e truth< but ;7 now---;

not-

$%>- Or again ;7 be#ie0e---; is an 6e3"ression6 but not ;7 now---;-

$%$- 9u""ose .oore had said ;7 swear---; instead of ;7 now---;-

$%2- 1he +ore "ri+iti0e idea is that the earth ne0er had a beginning- o chi#d has

reason to as hi+se#f how #ong the earth has e3isted because a## change taes "#ace

on it- 7f what is ca##ed the earth rea##y ca+e into e3istence at so+e ti+e 4 which is

hard enough to "icture 4 then one natura##y assu+es the beginning as ha0ing been

an inconcei0ab#y #ong ti+e ago-

$%@- ;7t is certain that after the batt#e of !uster#itI a"o#eon--- We## in that caseit6s sure#y a#so certain that the earth e3isted then-;

$%8- ;7t is certain that we didn6t arri0e on this "#anet fro+ another one a hundred

years ago-; We## it6s as certain as such things are-

$%*- 7t wou#d strie +e as ridicu#ous to want to doubt the e3istence of a"o#eon years ago "erha"s 7 shou#d

be +ore wi##ing to #isten for now he is doubting our who#e syste+ of e0idence- 7t

does not strie +e as if this syste+ were +ore certain than a certainty within it-

$%- ;7 +ight su""ose that a"o#eon ne0er e3isted and is a fab#e but not that the

earth did not e3ist $*> years ago-;

$%5- ;o you now that the earth e3isted thenA; 4 ;Of course 7 now that- 7 ha0e it

fro+ so+eone who certain#y nows a## about it-;

$%%- 7t stries +e as if so+eone who doubts the e3istence of the earth at that ti+e is

i+"ugning the nature of a## historica# e0idence- !nd 7 cannot say of this #atter that

it is definite#y correct-

$%&- !t so+e "oint one has to "ass fro+ e3"#anation to +ere descri"tion-

$&>- What we ca## historica# e0idence "oints to the e3istence of the earth a #ong

ti+e before +y birth< 4 the o""osite hy"othesis has nothing on its side-

$&$- We## if e0erything s"eas for an hy"othesis and nothing against it 4 is it then

certain#y trueA One +ay designate it as such- 4 But does it certain#y agree with

rea#ity with the factsA 4 With this uestion you are a#ready going round in a circ#e-

$&2- 1o be sure there is Hustification< but Hustification co+es to an end-

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

$&@- What does this +ean: the truth of a "ro"osition is a certainA


20/64

$&8- With the word ;certain; we e3"ress co+"#ete con0iction the tota# absence of

doubt and thereby we see to con0ince other "eo"#e- 1hat is subHecti0e certainty-

But when is so+ething obHecti0e#y certainA When a +istae is not "ossib#e- But

what ind of "ossibi#ity is thatA .ustn6t +istae be #ogica##y e3c#udedA

$&*- 7f 7 be#ie0e that 7 a+ sitting in +y roo+ when 7 a+ not then 7 sha## not be said

to ha0e +ade a +istae- But what is the essentia# difference between this case and

a +istaeA

$&- 9ure e0idence is what we acce"t as sure it is e0idence that we go by in acting

sure#y acting without any doubt- What we ca## ;a +istae; "#ays a uite s"ecia#

"art in our #anguage ga+es and so too does what we regard as certain e0idence-

$&5- 7t wou#d be nonsense to say that we regard so+ething as sure e0idence

because it is certain#y true-

$&%- Jather we +ust first deter+ine the ro#e of deciding for or against a

"ro"osition-

$&&- 1he reason why the use of the e3"ression ;true or fa#se; has so+ething

+is#eading about it is that it is #ie saying ;it ta##ies with the facts or it doesn6t;

and the 0ery thing that is in uestion is what ;ta##ying; is here-

2>>- Jea##y ;1he "ro"osition is either true or fa#se; on#y +eans that it +ust be

"ossib#e to decide for or against it- But this does not say what the ground for such a

decision is #ie-

2>$- 9u""ose so+eone were to as: ;7s it rea##y right for us to re#y on the e0idence

of our +e+ory (or our senses) as we doA;

2>2- .oore6s certain "ro"ositions a#+ost dec#are that we ha0e a right to re#y u"on

this e0idence-

2>@- D,0erything that we regard as e0idence indicates that the earth a#ready

e3isted #ong before +y birth- 1he contrary hy"othesis has nothing to confir+ it at

a##- 7f e0erything s"eas for an hy"othesis and nothing against it is it obHecti0e#y

certainA One can ca## it that- But does it necessari#y agree with the wor#d of factsA!t the 0ery best it shows us what ;agree+ent; +eans- We find it difficu#t to

i+agine it to be fa#se but a#so difficu#t to +ae use of-Fcrossed4out in .9 What

does this agree+ent consist in if not in the fact that what is e0idence in these

#anguage ga+es s"eas for our "ro"ositionA (1ractatus Logico4 Phi#oso"hicus)

2>8- Gi0ing grounds howe0er Hustifying the e0idence co+es to an end< 4 but the

end is not certain "ro"ositions6 striing us i++ediate#y as true i- e- it is not a ind

of seeing on our "art< it is our acting which #ies at the botto+ of the #anguage4

ga+e-

2>*- 7f the true is what is grounded then the ground is not true not yet fa#se-


21/64

2>- 7f so+eone ased us ;but is that trueA; we +ight say ;yes; to hi+< and if he

de+anded grounds we +ight say ;7 can6t gi0e you any grounds but if you #earn

+ore you too wi## thin the sa+e-; 7f this didn6t co+e about that wou#d +ean that

he cou#dn6t for e3a+"#e #earn history-

2>5- ;9trange coincidence that e0ery +an whose su## has been o"ened had abrain;

2>%- 7 ha0e a te#e"hone con0ersation with ew Eor- .y friend te##s +e that his

young trees ha0e buds of such and such a ind- 7 a+ now con0inced that his tree

is--- !+ 7 a#so con0inced that the earth e3istsA

2>&- 1he e3istence of the earth is rather "art of the who#e "icture which for+s the

starting4"oint of be#ief for +e-

2$>- oes +y te#e"hone ca## to ew Eor strengthen +y con0iction that the earth

e3istsA .uch see+s to be fi3ed and it is re+o0ed fro+ the traffic- 7t is a#so so tos"ea shunted onto an unused siding-

2$$- ow it gi0es our way of #ooing at things and our researches their for+-

Perha"s it was once dis"uted- But "erha"s for unthinab#e ages it has be#onged to

the scaffo#ding of our thoughts- (,0ery hu+an being has "arents-)

2$2- 7n certain circu+stances for e3a+"#e we regard a ca#cu#ation as sufficient#y

checed- What gi0es us a right to do soA ,3"erienceA .ay that not ha0e decei0ed

usA 9o+ewhere we +ust be finished with Hustification and then there re+ains the

"ro"osition that this is how we ca#cu#ate-

2$@- Our 6e+"irica# "ro"ositions6 do not for+ a ho+ogeneous +ass-

2$8- What "re0ents +e fro+ su""osing that this tab#e either 0anishes or a#ters its

sha"e and co#our when on one is obser0ing it and then when so+eone #oos at it

again changes bac to its o#d conditionA 4 ;But who is going to su""ose such a

thingA; 4 one wou#d fee# #ie saying-

2$*- /ere we see that the idea of 6agree+ent with rea#ity6 does not ha0e any c#ear

a""#ication-

2$- 1he "ro"osition ;7t is written;-

2$5- 7f so+eone su""osed that a## our ca#cu#ations were uncertain and that we

cou#d re#y on none of the+ (Hustifying hi+se#f by saying that +istaes are a#ways

"ossib#e) "erha"s we wou#d say he was craIy- But can we say he is in errorA oes

he not Hust react different#yA We re#y on ca#cu#ations he doesn6t< we are sure he

isn6t-

2$%- Can 7 be#ie0e for one +o+ent that 7 ha0e e0er been in the stratos"hereA o-

9o do 7 now the contrary #ie .ooreA

2$&- 1here cannot be any doubt about it for +e as a reasonab#e "erson- 4 1hat6s it-


22/64

4

22>- 1he reasonab#e +an does not ha0e certain doubts-

22$- Can 7 be in doubt at wi##A

222- 7 cannot "ossib#y doubt that 7 was ne0er in the stratos"here- oes that +ae

+e now itA oes it +ae it trueA

22@- ?or +ightn6t 7 be craIy and not doubting what 7 abso#ute#y ought to doubtA

228- ;7 now that it ne0er ha""ened for if it had ha""ened 7 cou#d not "ossib#y

ha0e forgotten it-; But su""osing it did ha""en then it Hust wou#d ha0e been the

case that you had forgotten it- !nd how do you now that you cou#d not "ossib#y

ha0e forgotten itA 7sn6t that Hust fro+ ear#ier e3"erienceA

22*- What 7 ho#d fast to is not one "ro"osition but a nest of "ro"ositions-

22- Can 7 gi0e the su""osition that 7 ha0e e0er been on the +oon any serious

consideration at a##A

225- ;7s that so+ething that one can forgetA;

22%- ;7n such circu+stances "eo"#e do not say 6Perha"s we60e a## forgotten6 and

the #ie but rather they assu+e that---;

22&- Our ta# gets its +eaning fro+ the rest of our "roceedings-

2@>- We are asing ourse#0es: what do we do with a state+ent ;7 now---;A ?or it

is not a uestion of +enta# "rocesses or +enta# states- !nd that is how one +ust

decide whether so+ething is now#edge or not-

2@$- 7f so+eone doubted whether the earth had e3isted a hundred years ago 7

shou#d not understand for this reason: 7 wou#d not now what such a "erson

wou#d sti## a##ow to be counted as e0idence and what not-

2@2- ;We cou#d doubt e0ery sing#e one of these facts but we cou#d not doubt the+

a##-; Wou#dn6t it be +ore correct to say: ;we do not doubt the+ a##;- Our notdoubting the+ a## is si+"#y our +anner of Hudging and therefore of acting-

2@@- 7f a chi#d ased +e whether the earth was a#ready there before +y birth 7

shou#d answer hi+ that the earth did not begin on#y with +y birth but that it

e3isted #ong #ong before- !nd 7 shou#d ha0e the fee#ing of saying so+ething funny-

Jather as if a chi#d had ased if such and such a +ountain were higher than a ta##

house that it had seen- 7n answering the uestion 7 shou#d ha0e to be i+"arting a

"icture of the wor#d to the "erson who ased it- 7f 7 do answer the uestion with

certainty what gi0es +e this certaintyA

2@8- 7 be#ie0e that 7 ha0e forebears and that e0ery hu+an being has the+- 7be#ie0e that there are 0arious cities and uite genera##y in the +ain facts of


23/64

geogra"hy and history- 7 be#ie0e that the earth is a body on whose surface we +o0e

and that it no +ore sudden#y disa""ears or the #ie than any other so#id body: this

tab#e this house this tree etc- 7f 7 wanted to doubt the e3istence of the earth #ong

before +y birth 7 shou#d ha0e to doubt a## sorts of things that stand fast for +e-

2@*- !nd that so+ething stands fast for +e is not grounded in +y stu"idity orcredu#ity-

2@- 7f so+eone said ;1he earth has not #ong been---; what wou#d he be

i+"ugningA o 7 nowA Wou#d it not ha0e to be what is ca##ed a scientific be#iefA

.ight it not be a +ystica# oneA 7s there any abso#ute necessity for hi+ to be

contradicting historica# factsA or e0en geogra"hica# onesA

2@5- 7f 7 say ;an hour ago this tab#e didn6t e3ist; 7 "robab#y +ean that it was on#y

+ade #ater on- 7f 7 say ;this +ountain didn6t e3ist then; 7 "resu+ab#y +ean that it

was on#y for+ed #ater on 4 "erha"s by a 0o#cano- 7f 7 say ;this +ountain didn6t

e3ist an hour ago; that is such a strange state+ent that it is not c#ear what 7 +ean-Whether for e3a+"#e 7 +ean so+ething untrue but scientific- Perha"s you thin

that the state+ent that the +ountain didn6t e3ist then is uite c#ear howe0er one

concei0es the conte3t- But su""ose so+eone said ;1his +ountain didn6t e3ist a

+inute ago but an e3act#y si+i#ar one did instead-; On#y the accusto+ed conte3t

a##ows what is +eant to co+e through c#ear#y-

2@%- 7 +ight therefore interrogate so+eone who said that the earth did not e3ist

before his birth in order to find out which of +y con0ictions he was at odds with-

!nd then it +ight be that he was contradicting +y funda+enta# attitudes and if

that were how it was 7 shou#d ha0e to "ut u" with it- 9i+i#ar#y if he said he had at

so+e ti+e been on the +oon-

2@&- 7 be#ie0e that e0ery hu+an being has two hu+an "arents< but Catho#ics

be#ie0e that Kesus on#y had a hu+an +other- !nd other "eo"#e +ight be#ie0e that

there are hu+an beings with no "arents and gi0e no credence to a## the contrary

e0idence- Catho#ics be#ie0e as we## that in certain circu+stances a wafer co+"#ete#y

changes its nature and at the sa+e ti+e that a## e0idence "ro0es the contrary- !nd

so if .oore said ;7 now that this is wine and not b#ood; Catho#ics wou#d

contradict hi+-

28>- What is the be#ief that a## hu+an beings ha0e "arents based onA One3"erience- !nd how can 7 base this sure be#ief on +y e3"erienceA We## 7 base it

not on#y on the fact that 7 ha0e nown the "arents of certain "eo"#e but on

e0erything that 7 ha0e #earnt about the se3ua# #ife of hu+an beings and their

anato+y and "hysio#ogy: a#so on what 7 ha0e heard and seen of ani+a#s- But then

is that rea##y a "roofA

28$- 7sn6t this an hy"othesis which as 7 be#ie0e is again and again co+"#ete#y

confir+edA

282- .ustn6t we say at e0ery turn: ;7 be#ie0e this with certainty;A

28@- One says ;7 now; when one is ready to gi0e co+"e##ing grounds- ;7 now;


24/64

re#ates to a "ossibi#ity of de+onstrating the truth- Whether so+eone nows

so+ething can co+e to #ight assu+ing that he is con0inced of it- But if what he

be#ie0es is of such a ind that the grounds that he can gi0e are no surer than his

assertion then he cannot say that he nows what he be#ie0es-

288- 7f so+eone says ;7 ha0e a body; he can be ased ;Who is s"eaing here withthis +outhA;

28*- 1o who+ does anyone say that he nows so+ethingA 1o hi+se#f or to

so+eone e#se- 7f he says it to hi+se#f how is it distinguished fro+ the assertion that

he is sure that things are #ie thatA 1here is no subHecti0e sureness that 7 now

so+ething- 1he certainty is subHecti0e but not the now#edge- 9o if 7 say ;7 now

that 7 ha0e two hands; and that is not su""osed to e3"ress Hust +y subHecti0e

certainty 7 +ust be ab#e to satisfy +yse#f that 7 a+ right- But 7 can6t do that for

+y ha0ing two hands is not #ess certain before 7 ha0e #ooed at the+ than

afterwards- But 7 cou#d say: ;1hat 7 ha0e two hands is an irre0ersib#e be#ief-; 1hat

wou#d e3"ress the fact that 7 a+ not ready to #et anything count as a dis"roof ofthis "ro"osition-

28- ;/ere 7 ha0e arri0ed at a foundation of a## +y be#iefs-; ;1his "osition 7 wi##

ho#d; But isn6t that "recise#y on#y because 7 a+ co+"#ete#y con0inced of itA 4

What is 6being co+"#ete#y con0inced6 #ieA

285- What wou#d it be #ie to doubt now whether 7 ha0e two handsA Why can6t 7

i+agine it at a##A What wou#d 7 be#ie0e if 7 didn6t be#ie0e thatA 9o far 7 ha0e no

syste+ at a## within which this doubt +ight e3ist-

28%- 7 ha0e arri0ed at the roc botto+ of +y con0ictions- !nd one +ight a#+ost

say that these foundation4wa##s are carried by the who#e house-

28&- One gi0es onese#f a fa#se "icture of doubt-

2*>- .y ha0ing two hands is in nor+a# circu+stances as certain as anything that

7 cou#d "roduce in e0idence for it- 1hat is why 7 a+ not in a "osition to tae the

sight of +y hand as e0idence for it-

2*$- oesn6t this +ean: 7 sha## "roceed according to this be#ief unconditiona##y

and not #et anything confuse +eA

2*2- But it isn6t Hust that 7 be#ie0e in this way that 7 ha0e two hands but that e0ery

reasonab#e "erson does-

2*@- !t the foundation of we##4founded be#ief #ies be#ief that is not founded-

2*8- !ny 6reasonab#e6 "erson beha0es #ie this-

2**- oubting has certain characteristic +anifestations but they are on#y

characteristic of it in "articu#ar circu+stances- 7f so+eone said that he doubted the

e3istence of his hands e"t #ooing at the+ fro+ a## sides tried to +ae sure itwasn6t 6a## done by +irrors6 etc- we shou#d not be sure whether we ought to ca##


25/64

this doubting- We +ight describe his way of beha0ing as #ie the beha0iour of

doubt but this ga+e wou#d be not be ours-

2*-

On the other hand a #anguage4ga+e does change with ti+e-

2*5- 7f so+eone said to +e that he doubted whether he had a body 7 shou#d tae

hi+ to be a ha#f4wit- But 7 shou#dn6t now what it wou#d +ean to try to con0ince

hi+ that he had one- !nd if 7 had said so+ething and that had re+o0ed his doubt

7 shou#d not now how or why-

2*%- 7 do not now how the sentence ;7 ha0e a body; is to be used- 1hat doesn6t

unconditiona##y a""#y to the "ro"osition that 7 ha0e a#ways been on or near the

surface of the earth-

2*&- 9o+eone who doubted whether the earth had e3isted for $>> years +ight ha0e

a scientific or on the other hand "hi#oso"hica# doubt-

2>- 7 wou#d #ie to reser0e the e3"ression ;7 now; for the cases in which it is

used in nor+a# #inguistic e3change-

2$- 7 cannot at "resent i+agine a reasonab#e doubt as to the e3istence of the earth

during the #ast $>> years-

22- 7 can i+agine a +an who had grown u" in uite s"ecia# circu+stances and

been taught that the earth ca+e into being *> years ago and therefore be#ie0ed

this- We +ight instruct hi+: the earth has #ong--- etc- 4 We shou#d be trying to gi0e

hi+ our "icture of the wor#d- 1his wou#d ha""en through a ind of "ersuasion-

2@- 1he schoo#boy be#ie0es his teachers and his schoo#boos-

28- 7 cou#d i+agine .oore being ca"tured by a wi#d tribe and their e3"ressing

the sus"icion that he has co+e fro+ so+ewhere between the earth and the +oon-

.oore te##s the+ that he nows etc- but he can6t gi0e the+ the grounds for his

certainty because they ha0e fantastic ideas of hu+an abi#ity to f#y and now

nothing about "hysics- 1his wou#d be an occasion for +aing that state+ent-

2*- But what does it say beyond ;7 ha0e ne0er been to such and such a "#ace andha0e co+"e##ing grounds to be#ie0e that;A

2- !nd here one wou#d sti## ha0e to say what are co+"e##ing grounds-

25- ;7 don6t +ere#y ha0e the 0isua# i+"ression of a tree: 7 now that it is a tree;-

2%- ;7 now that this is a hand-; 4 !nd what is a handA 4 ;We## this for

e3a+"#e;-

2&- !+ 7 +ore certain that 7 ha0e ne0er been on the +oon than that 7 ha0e ne0er

been in Bu#gariaA Why a+ 7 so sureA We## 7 now that 7 ha0e ne0er beenanywhere in the neighbourhood 4 for e3a+"#e 7 ha0e ne0er been in the Ba#ans-


26/64

25>- ;7 ha0e co+"e##ing grounds for +y certitude-; 1hese grounds +ae the

certitude obHecti0e-

25$- What is a te##ing ground for so+ething is not anything 7 decide-

252- 7 now 7 a+ fa+i#iar with it as a certainty-

25@- But when does one say of so+ething that it is certainA ?or there can be

dis"ute whether so+ething is certain< 7 +ean when so+ething is obHecti0e#y

certain- 1here are count#ess genera# e+"irica# "ro"ositions that count as certain

for us-

258- One such is that if so+eone6s ar+ is cut off it wi## not grow again- !nother if

so+eone6s head is cut off he is dead and wi## ne0er #i0e again- ,3"erience can be

said to teach us these "ro"ositions- /owe0er it does not teach us the+ in iso#ation:

rather it teaches us a host of interde"endent "ro"ositions- 7f they were iso#ated 7+ight "erha"s doubt the+ for 7 ha0e no e3"erience re#ating to the+-

25*- 7f e3"erience is the ground of our certainty then natura##y it is "ast

e3"erience- !nd it isn6t for e3a+"#e Hust +y e3"erience but other6s "eo"#e6s that 7

get now#edge fro+- ow one +ight say that it is e3"erience again that #eads us to

gi0e credence to others- But what e3"erience +aes +e be#ie0e that the anato+y

and "hysio#ogy boos don6t contain what is fa#seA 1hough it is true that this trust is

baced u" by +y own e3"erience-

25- We be#ie0e so to s"ea that this great bui#ding e3ists and then we see now

here now there one or another s+a## corner of it-

255- ;7 can6t he#" be#ie0ing---;

25%- ;7 a+ co+fortab#e that that is how things are-;

25&- 7t is uite sure that +otor cars don6t grow out of the earth- We fee# that if

so+eone cou#d be#ie0e the contrary he cou#d be#ie0e e0erything that we say is

untrue and cou#d uestion e0erything that we ho#d to be sure- But how does this

one be#ief hang together with a## the restA We shou#d #ie to say that so+eone who

cou#d be#ie0e that does not acce"t our who#e syste+ of 0erification- 1his syste+ isso+ething that a hu+an being acuires by +eans of obser0ation and instruction- 7

intentiona##y do not say ;#earns;-

2%>- !fter he has seen this and this and heard that and that he is not in a "osition

to doubt whether---

2%$- 7 L- W- be#ie0e a+ sure that +y friend hasn6t sawdust in his body or in his

head e0en though 7 ha0e no direct e0idence of +y senses to the contrary- 7 a+

sure by reason of what has been said to +e of what 7 ha0e read and of +y

e3"erience- 1o ha0e doubts about it wou#d see+ to +e +adness 4 of course this is

a#so in agree+ent with other "eo"#e< but 7 agree with the+-


27/64

2%2- 7 cannot say that 7 ha0e good grounds for the o"inion that cats do not grow on

trees or that 7 had a father and a +other- 7f so+eone has doubts about it 4 how is

that su""osed to ha0e co+e aboutA By his ne0er fro+ the beginning ha0ing

be#ie0ed that he had "arentsA But then is that concei0ab#e un#ess he has been

taught itA

2%@- ?or how can a chi#d i++ediate#y doubt what it is taughtA 1hat cou#d +ean

on#y that he was inca"ab#e of #earning certain #anguage ga+es-

2%8- Peo"#e ha0e i##ed ani+a#s since the ear#iest ti+es used the fur bones etc- etc-

for 0arious "ur"oses< they ha0e counted definite#y on finding si+i#ar "arts in any

si+i#ar beast- 1hey ha0e a#ways #earnt fro+ e3"erience< and we can see fro+ their

actions that they be#ie0e certain things definite#y whether they e3"ress this be#ief

or not- By this 7 natura##y do not want to say that +en shou#d beha0e #ie this but

on#y that they do beha0e #ie this-

2%*- 7f so+eone is #ooing for so+ething and "erha"s roots around in a certain"#ace he shows that he be#ie0es that what he is #ooing for is there-

2%- What we be#ie0e de"ends on what we #earn- We a## be#ie0e that it isn6t "ossib#e

to get to the +oon< but there +ight be "eo"#e who be#ie0e that that is "ossib#e and

that it so+eti+es ha""ens- We say: these "eo"#e do not now a #ot that we now-

!nd #et the+ be ne0er so sure of their be#ief 4 they are wrong and we now it- 7f

we co+"are our syste+ of now#edge with theirs then theirs is e0ident#y the "oorer

one by far-

2@-&-*>

2%5- 1he suirre# does not infer by induction that it is going to need stores ne3t

winter as we##- !nd no +ore do we need a #aw of induction to Hustify our actions or

our "redictions-

2%%- 7 now not Hust that the earth e3isted #ong before +y birth but a#so that it is a

#arge body that this has been estab#ished that 7 and the rest of +anind ha0e

forebears that there are boos about a## this that such boos don6t #ie etc- etc- etc-

!nd 7 now a## thisA 7 be#ie0e it- 1his body of now#edge has been handed on to +e

and 7 ha0e no grounds for doubting it but on the contrary a## sorts of

confir+ation- !nd why shou#dn6t 7 say that 7 now a## thisA 7sn6t that what one

does sayA But not on#y 7 now or be#ie0e a## that but the others do too- Or rather7 be#ie0e that they be#ie0e it-

2%&- 7 a+ fir+#y con0inced that others be#ie0e be#ie0e they now that a## that is in

fact so-

2&>- 7 +yse#f wrote in +y boo that chi#dren #earn to understand a word in such

and such a way- o 7 now that or do 7 be#ie0e itA Why in such a case do 7 write

not ;7 be#ie0e etc-; but si+"#y the indicati0e sentenceA

2&$- We now that the earth is round- We ha0e definiti0e#y ascertained that it is

round- We sha## stic to this o"inion un#ess our who#e way of seeing naturechanges- ;/ow do you now thatA; 4 7 be#ie0e it-


28/64

2&2- ?urther e3"eri+ents cannot gi0e the #ie to our ear#ier ones at +ost they +ay

change our who#e way of #ooing at things-

2&@- 9i+i#ar#y with the sentence ;water boi#s at $>> C;-

2&8- 1his is how we acuire con0iction this is ca##ed ;being right#y con0inced;-

2&*- 9o hasn6t one in this sense a "roof of the "ro"ositionA But that the sa+e thing

has ha""ened again is not a "roof of it< though we do say that it gi0es us a right to

assu+e it-

2&- 1his is what we ca## an ;e+"irica# foundation; for our assu+"tions-

2&5- ?or we #earn not Hust that such and such e3"eri+ents had those and those

resu#ts but a#so the conc#usion which is drawn- !nd of course there is nothing

wrong in our doing so- ?or this inferred "ro"osition is an instru+ent for adefiniti0e use-

2&%- 6We are uite sure of it6 does not +ean Hust that e0ery sing#e "erson is certain

of it but that we be#ong to a co++unity which is bound together by science and

education-

2&&- We are satisfied that the earth is round- D7n ,ng#ishF

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

$>-@-*$

@>>- ot a## corrections of our 0iews are on the sa+e #e0e#-

@>$- 9u""osing it wasn6t true that the earth had a#ready e3isted #ong before 7 was

born 4 how shou#d we i+agine the +istae being disco0eredA

@>2- 7t6s no good saying ;Perha"s we are wrong; when if no e0idence is

trustworthy trust is e3c#uded in the case of the "resent e0idence-

@>@- 7f for e3a+"#e we ha0e a#ways been +isca#cu#ating and twe#0e ti+es twe#0e

isn6t a hundred and forty4four why shou#d we trust any other ca#cu#ationA !nd of

course that is wrong#y "ut-

@>8- But nor a+ 7 +aing a +istae about twe#0e ti+es twe#0e being a hundred

and forty4four- 7 +ay say #ater that 7 was confused Hust now but not that 7 was

+aing a +istae-

@>*- /ere once +ore there is needed a ste" #ie the one taen in re#ati0ity theory-

@>- ;7 don6t now if this is a hand-; But do you now what the word ;hand;

+eansA !nd don6t say ;7 now that it +eans now for +e;- !nd isn6t it an

e+"irica# fact 4 that this word is used #ie thisA

@>5- !nd here the strange thing is that when 7 a+ uite certain of how the words


29/64

are used ha0e no doubt about it 7 can sti## gi0e no grounds for +y way of going

on- 7f 7 tried 7 cou#d gi0e a thousand but none as certain as the 0ery thing they

were su""osed to be grounds for-

@>%- 6now#edge6 and 6certainty6 be#ong to different categories- 1hey are not two

6+enta# states6 #ie say 6sur+ising6 and 6being sure6- (/ere 7 assu+e that it is+eaningfu# for +e to say ;7 now what (e- g-) the word 6doubt6 +eans; and that

this sentence indicates that the word ;doubt; has a #ogica# ro#e-) What interests us

now is not being sure but now#edge- 1hat is we are interested in the fact that

about certain e+"irica# "ro"ositions no doubt can e3ist if +aing Hudg+ents is to

be "ossib#e at a##- Or again: 7 a+ inc#ined to be#ie0e that not e0erything that has

the for+ of an e+"irica# "ro"osition is one-

@>&- 7s it that ru#e and e+"irica# "ro"osition +erge into one anotherA

@$>- ! "u"i# and a teacher- 1he "u"i# wi## not #et anything be e3"#ained to hi+ for

he continua##y interru"ts with doubts for instance as to the e3istence of things the+eaning of words etc- 1he teacher says ;9to" interru"ting +e and do as 7 te## you-

9o far your doubts don6t +ae sense at a##-;

@$$- Or i+agine that the boy uestioned the truth of history (and e0erything that

connects u" with it) 4 and e0en whether the earth e3isted at a## a hundred years

before-

@$2- /ere it stries +e as if this doubt were ho##ow- But in that case 4 isn6t be#ief in

history ho##ow tooA o: there is so +uch that this connects u" with-

@$@- 9o is that what +aes us be#ie0e a "ro"ositionA We## 4 the gra++ar of

;be#ie0e; Hust does hang together with the gra++ar of the "ro"osition be#ie0ed-

@$8- 7+agine that the schoo#boy rea##y did as ;and is there a tab#e there e0en

when 7 turn around and e0en when no one is there to see itA; 7s the teacher to

reassure hi+ 4 and say ;of course there is;A Perha"s the teacher wi## get a bit

i+"atient but thin that the boy wi## grow out of asing such uestions-

@$*- 1hat is to say the teacher wi## fee# that this is not rea##y a #egiti+ate uestion

at a##- !nd it wou#d be Hust the sa+e if the "u"i# cast doubt on the unifor+ity of

nature that is to say on the Hustification of inducti0e argu+ents- 4 1he teacherwou#d fee# that this was on#y ho#ding the+ u" that this way the "u"i# wou#d on#y

get stuc and +ae no "rogress- 4 !nd he wou#d be right- 7t wou#d be as if so+eone

were #ooing for so+e obHect in a roo+< he o"ens a drawer and doesn6t see it there- /ere one +ust 7 be#ie0e re+e+ber that the conce"t 6"ro"osition6 itse#f is not

a shar" one-

@2$- 7sn6t what 7 a+ saying: any e+"irica# "ro"osition can be transfor+ed into a

"ostu#ate 4 and then beco+es a nor+ of descri"tion- But 7 a+ sus"icious e0en of

this- 1he sentence is too genera#- One a#+ost wants to say ;any e+"irica#"ro"osition can theoretica##y be transfor+ed---; but what does ;theoretica##y;

+ean hereA 7t sounds a## to re+iniscent of the 1ractatus-

@22- What if the "u"i# refused to be#ie0e that this +ountain had been there beyond

hu+an +e+oryA We shou#d say that he had no grounds for this sus"icion-

@2@- 9o rationa# sus"icion +ust ha0e groundsA We +ight a#so say: ;the reasonab#e

+an be#ie0es this;-

@28- 1hus we shou#d not ca## anybody reasonab#e who be#ie0ed so+ething in

des"ite of scientific e0idence-

@2*- When we say that we now that such and such--- we +ean that any

reasonab#e "erson in our "osition wou#d a#so now it that it wou#d be a "iece of

unreason to doubt it- 1hus .oore wants to say not +ere#y that he nows that he

etc- etc- but a#so that anyone endowed with reason in his "osition wou#d now it

Hust the sa+e-

@2- But who says what it is reasonab#e to be#ie0e in this situationA

@25- 9o it +ight be said: ;1he reasonab#e +an be#ie0es: that the earth has beenthere since #ong before his birth that his #ife has been s"ent on the surface of the

earth or near it that he has ne0er for e3a+"#e been on the +oon that he has a

ner0ous syste+ and 0arious innards #ie a## other "eo"#e etc- etc-;

@2%- ;7 now it as 7 now that +y na+e is L- W-;

@2&- 67f he ca##s that in doubt 4 whate0er ;doubt; +eans here 4 he wi## ne0er #earn

this ga+e6-

@@>- 9o here the sentence ;7 now---; e3"resses the readiness to be#ie0e certain

things-


31/64

$@-@-

@@$- 7f we e0er do act with certainty on the strength of be#ief shou#d we wonder

that there is +uch we cannot doubtA

@@2- 7+agine that so+eone were to say without wanting to "hi#oso"hiIe ;7 don6t

now if 7 ha0e e0er been on the +oon< 7 don6t re+e+ber e0er ha0ing been there;-(Why wou#d this "erson be so radica##y different fro+ usA) 7n the first "#ace 4 how

wou#d he now that he was on the +oonA /ow does he i+agine itA Co+"are: ;7 do

not now if 7 was e0er in the 0i##age of Q-; But neither cou#d 7 say that if Q were in

1urey for 7 now that 7 was ne0er in 1urey-

@@@- 7 as so+eone ;/a0e you e0er been in ChinaA; /e re"#ies ;7 don6t now;-

/ere one wou#d sure#y say ;Eou don6t nowA /a0e you any reason to be#ie0e you

+ight ha0e been there at so+e ti+eA Were you for e3a+"#e e0er near the Chinese

borderA Or were your "arents there at the ti+e when you were going to be bornA;

4 or+a##y ,uro"eans do now whether they ha0e been in China or not-

@@8- 1hat is to say: on#y in such4and4such circu+stances does a reasonab#e "erson

doubt that-

@@*- 1he "rocedure in a court of #aw rests on the fact that circu+stances gi0e

state+ents a certain "robabi#ity- 1he state+ent that for e3a+"#e so+eone ca+e

into the wor#d without "arents wou#dn6t e0er be taen into consideration there-

@@- But what +en consider reasonab#e or unreasonab#e a#ters- !t certain "eriods

+en find reasonab#e what at other "eriods they found unreasonab#e- !nd 0ice4

0ersa- But is there no obHecti0e character hereA 'ery inte##igent and we##4educated

"eo"#e be#ie0e in the story of creation in the Bib#e whi#e others ho#d it as "ro0en

fa#se and the grounds of the #atter are we## nown to the for+er-

@@5- One cannot +ae e3"eri+ents if there are not so+e things that one does not

doubt- But that does not +ean that one taes certain "resu""ositions on trust-

When 7 write a #etter and "ost it 7 tae it for granted that it wi## arri0e 4 7 e3"ect

this- 7f 7 +ae an e3"eri+ent 7 do not doubt the e3istence of the a""aratus before

+y eyes- 7 ha0e "#enty of doubts but not that- 7f 7 do a ca#cu#ation 7 be#ie0e

without any doubts that the figures on the "a"er aren6t switching of their own

accord and 7 a#so trust +y +e+ory the who#e ti+e and trust it without any

reser0ation- 1he certainty here is the sa+e as that of +y ne0er ha0ing been on the+oon-

@@%- But i+agine "eo"#e who were ne0er uite certain of these things but said that

they were 0ery "robab#y so and that it did not "ay to doubt the+- 9uch a "erson

then wou#d say in +y situation: ;7t is e3tre+e#y un#ie#y that 7 ha0e e0er been on

the +oon; etc- etc- /ow wou#d the #ife of these "eo"#e differ fro+ oursA ?or there

are "eo"#e who say that it is +ere#y e3tre+e#y "robab#e that water o0er a fire wi##

boi# and not freeIe and that therefore strict#y s"eaing what we consider

i+"ossib#e is on#y i+"robab#e- What difference does this +ae in their #i0esA 7sn6t

it Hust that they ta# rather +ore about certain things that the rest of usA

@@&- 7+agine so+eone who is su""osed to fetch a friend fro+ the rai#way station


32/64

and doesn6t si+"#y #oo the train u" in the ti+e4tab#e and go to the station at the

right ti+e but says:;7 ha0e no be#ief that the train wi## rea##y arri0e but 7 wi## go

to the station a## the sa+e-; /e does e0erything that the nor+a# "erson does but

acco+"anies it with doubts or with se#f4annoyance etc-

@8>- We now with the sa+e certainty with which we be#ie0e any +athe+atica#"ro"osition how the #etters ! and B are "ronounced what the co#our of hu+an

b#ood is ca##ed that other hu+an beings ha0e b#ood and ca## it ;b#ood;-

@8$- 1hat is to say the uestions that we raise and our doubts de"end on the fact

that so+e "ro"ositions are e3e+"t fro+ doubt are as it were #ie hinges on which

those turn-

@82- 1hat is to say it be#ongs to the #ogic of our scientific in0estigations that certain

things are in deed not doubted-

@8@- But it isn6t that the situation is #ie this: We Hust can6t in0estigate e0erythingand for that reason we are forced to rest content with assu+"tion- 7f 7 want the

door to turn the hinges +ust stay "ut-

@88- .y #ife consists in +y being content to acce"t +any things-

@8*- 7f 7 as so+eone ;what co#our do you see at the +o+entA; in order that is to

#earn what co#our is there at the +o+ent 7 cannot at the sa+e ti+e uestion

whether the "erson 7 as understands ,ng#ish whether he wants to tae +e in

whether +y own +e+ory is not #ea0ing +e in the #urch as to the na+es of co#ours

and so on-

@8- When 7 a+ trying to +ate so+eone in chess 7 cannot ha0e doubts about the

"ieces "erha"s changing "#aces of the+se#0es and +y +e+ory si+u#taneous#y

"#aying trics on +e so that 7 don6t notice-

$*-@-*$

@85- ;7 now that that6s a tree-; Why does it strie +e as if 7 did not understand

the sentenceA though it is after a## an e3tre+e#y si+"#e sentence of the +ost

ordinary indA 7t is as if 7 cou#d not focus +y +ind on any +eaning- 9i+"#y

because 7 don6t #oo for the focus where the +eaning is- !s soon as 7 thin of an

e0eryday use of the sentence instead of a "hi#oso"hica# one its +eaning beco+esc#ear and ordinary-

@8%- Kust as the words ;7 a+ here; ha0e a +eaning on#y in certain conte3ts and

not when 7 say the+ to so+eone who is sitting in front of +e and sees +e c#ear#y 4

and not because they are su"erf#uous but because their +eaning is not deter+ined

by the situation yet stands in need of such deter+ination-

@8&- ;7 now that that6s a tree; 4 this +ay +ean a## sorts of things: 7 #oo at a "#ant

that 7 tae for a young beech and that so+eone e#se thins is a b#ac4currant- /e

says ;that6s a shrub;< 7 say it is a tree- 4 We see so+ething in the +ist which one of

us taes for a +an and the other says ;7 now that that6s a tree;- 9o+eone wantsto test +y eyes etc- etc- 4 etc- etc- ,ach ti+e the 6that6 which 7 dec#are to be a tree is


33/64

of a different ind- But what when we e3"ress ourse#0es +ore "recise#yA ?or

e3a+"#e: ;7 now that that thing there is a tree 7 can see it uite c#ear#y-; 4 Let us

e0en su""ose 7 had +ade this re+ar in the conte3t of a con0ersation (so that it

was re#e0ant when 7 +ade it)< and now out of a## conte3t 7 re"eat it whi#e #ooing

at the tree and 7 add ;7 +ean these words as 7 did fi0e +inutes ago;- 7f 7 added

for e3a+"#e that 7 had been thining of +y bad eyes again and it was a ind ofsigh then there wou#d be nothing "uII#ing about the re+ar- ?or how a sentence

is +eant can be e3"ressed by an e3"ansion of it and +ay therefore be +ade "art of

it-

@*>- ;7 now that that6s a tree; is so+ething a "hi#oso"her +ight say to

de+onstrate to hi+se#f or to so+eone e#se that he nows so+ething that is not a

+athe+atica# or #ogica# truth- 9i+i#ar#y so+eone who was entertaining the idea

that he was no use any +ore +ight ee" re"eating to hi+se#f ;7 can sti## do this

and this and this-; 7f such thoughts often "ossessed hi+ one wou#d not be

sur"rised if he a""arent#y out of a## conte3t s"oe such a sentence out #oud- (But

here 7 ha0e a#ready setched a bacground a surrounding for this re+ar that isto say gi0en it a conte3t-) But if so+eone in uite heterogeneous circu+stances

ca##ed out with the +ost con0incing +i+icry: ;own with hi+; one +ight say of

these words (and their tone) that they were a "attern that does indeed ha0e

fa+i#iar a""#ications but that in this case it was not e0en c#ear what #anguage the

+an in uestion was s"eaing- 7 +ight +ae with +y hand the +o0e+ent 7 shou#d

+ae if 7 were ho#ding a hand4saw and sawing through a "#an< but wou#d one

ha0e any right to ca## this +o0e+ent sawing out of a## conte3tA 4 (7t +ight be

so+ething uite different)

@*$- 7sn6t the uestion ;ha0e these words a +eaningA; si+i#ar to ;7s that a too#A;

ased as one "roduces say a ha++erA 7 say ;Ees it6s a ha++er-; But what if the

thing that any of us wou#d tae for a ha++er were so+ewhere e#se a +issi#e for

e3a+"#e or a conductor6s batonA ow +ae the a""#ication yourse#f-

@*2- 7f so+eone says ;7 now that that6s a tree; 7 +ay answer: ;Ees that is a

sentence- !n ,ng#ish sentence- !nd what is it su""osed to be doingA; 9u""ose he

re"#ies: ;7 Hust wanted to re+ind +yse#f that 7 now thing #ie that;A 4

@*@- But su""ose he said ;7 want to +ae a #ogica# obser0ation;A 4 7f a forester

goes into a wood with his +en and says ;1his tree has got to be cut down and this

one and this one; 44 what if he then obser0es ;7 now that that6s a tree;A 4 But+ight not 7 say of the forester ;/e nows that that6s a tree 4 he doesn6t e3a+ine it

or order his +en to e3a+ine it;A

@*8- oubting and non4doubting beha0ior- 1here is the first on#y if there is the

second-

@**- ! +ad4doctor ("erha"s) +ight as +e ;o you now what that isA; and 7

+ight re"#y ;7 now that it6s a chair< 7 recogniIe it it6s a#ways been in +y roo+;-

/e says this "ossib#y to test not +y eyes but +y abi#ity to recogniIe things to

now their na+es and their functions- What is in uestion here is a ind of

nowing one6s way about- ow it wou#d be wrong for +e to say ;7 be#ie0e that it6sa chair; because that wou#d e3"ress +y readiness for +y state+ent to be tested-


34/64

Whi#e ;7 now that it---; i+"#ies bewi#der+ent if what 7 said was not confir+ed-

@*- .y ;+enta# state; the ;nowing; gi0es +e no guarantee of what wi##

ha""en- But it consists in this that 7 shou#d not understand where a doubt cou#d

get a footho#d nor where a further test was "ossib#e-

@*5- One +ight say: ; 67 now6 e3"resses co+fortab#e certainty not the certainty

that is sti## strugg#ing-;

@*%- ow 7 wou#d #ie to regard this certainty not as so+ething ain to hastiness

or su"erficia#ity but as a for+ of #ife- (1hat is 0ery bad#y e3"ressed and "robab#y

bad#y thought as we##-)

@*&- But that +eans 7 want to concei0e it as so+ething that #ies beyond being

Hustified or unHustified< as it were as so+ething ani+a#-

@>- 7 now that this is +y foot- 7 cou#d not acce"t any e3"erience as "roof to thecontrary- 4 1hat +ay be an e3c#a+ation< but what fo##ows fro+ itA !t #east that 7

sha## act with a certainty that nows no doubt in accordance with +y be#ief-

@$- But 7 +ight a#so say: 7t has been re0ea#ed to +e by God that it is so- God has

taught +e that this is +y foot- !nd therefore if anything ha""ened that see+ed to

conf#ict with this now#edge 7 shou#d ha0e to regard that as dece"tion-

@2- But doesn6t it co+e out here that now#edge is re#ated to a a decisionA

@@- !nd here it is difficu#t to find the transition fro+ the e3c#a+ation one wou#d

#ie to +ae to its conseuences in what one does-

@8- One +ight a#so "ut this uestion: ;7f you now that that is your foot 4 do you

a#so now or do you on#y be#ie0e that no future e3"erience wi## see+ to contradict

your now#edgeA; (1hat is that nothing wi## see+ to you yourse#f to do so-)

@*- 7f so+eone re"#ied: ;7 a#so now that it wi## ne0er see+ to +e as if anything

contradicted that now#edge; 4 what cou#d we gather fro+ that e3ce"t that he

hi+se#f had no doubt that it wou#d ne0er ha""enA 4

@- 9u""ose it were forbidden to say ;7 now; and on#y a##owed to say ;7 be#ie0e7 now;A

@5- 7sn6t it the "ur"ose of construing a word #ie ;now; ana#ogous#y to ;be#ie0e;

that then o""robriu+ attaches to the state+ent ;7 now; if the "erson who +aes

it is wrongA !s a resu#t a +istae beco+es so+ething forbidden-

@%- 7f so+eone says that he wi## recogniIe no e3"erience as "roof of the o""osite

that is after a## a decision- 7t is "ossib#e that he wi## act against it-

$-@-*$

@&- 7f 7 wanted to doubt whether this was +y hand how cou#d 7 a0oid doubtingwhether the word ;hand; has any +eaningA 9o that is so+ething 7 see+ to now

ludwig wittgenstein.doc

Documents