You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Pages 3 (753 words)
In 2.172, the author, Wittgenstein notes that there way the picture can its pictographic form. From this view, there are different perspectives to this statement:
1. No picture element can correspond to the pictorial form of the picture.
2. No picture can be able to depict that it has a pictorial form 3. It is not possible for a picture to portray that any other image owns a pictographic appearance. 4. It is not possible for a picture to portray its own pictorial form. Statements 2 and 3 can only be valid if a picture is corresponding to a particular item in reality; this is an statement that is still debatable. In to accept this requirement, a counter example to 2 and 3 is that a spatial picture is capable of depicting anything that is spatial. In this case, therefore, for a normality that is partial to be portrayed, it means that spatial structures of the picture imply the pictorial appearance of the picture. The spatial normality depicted means the spatial appearance is also portrayed. We represent facts about reality to ourselves through pictures. The elements a picture has correspond to the elements that a fact also has. These elements constitute the fact. For instance, if a fact is formed by the combination of three pictures, then the fact also represents the three pictures if its picture is also taken. The elements of the three pictures must also be seen in the picture of the fact as well; all combined in a particular similar way. This combination of the elements of the image is what the author referred to as the structure of the picture. The illustrative appearance is what enables a picture to be able to organize its elements or components in a given determinate way. ...
Not exactly what you need?