Metaphysical Language: Does it have any Meaning?

When we speak of something as metaphysical, we speak of something that is usually characterized as supernatural or something that is non perceptible by our senses. When we talk about the things that our minds eyes go over and non the things that our physical eyes know, we atomic number 18 talking in the talking to that is metaphysical.This is hotshot of the things that the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein looks into in his book Tractatus Logico Philosophicus. Wittgenstein argues that metaphysical language does not concur any convey. They are as good as words that do not markerify anything. He even cont annuls that the metaphysical educational activitys should not be saidThe right method in philosophy would be this. To introduce zipper except what can be said, i.e. ,the propositions of natural science, i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy and then always, when some star else wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had devoted a meaning to certain signs in his propositions. This method would not be satisfying to the other he would not convey the feeling that we were teach him philosophy only if it would be the only strictly correct method. Whereof one cannot speak, in that locationof one must be silent. (Wittgenstein, 6.53-7)This does not mean that metaphysical propositions are all automatically false. What Wittgenstein means is that it is beyond the realm of logical system for us to understand metaphysical language. This is not be causa they are profound or beyond our reality or beyond our senses but be trend, for Wittgenstein, they have no sense.To illuminate, let us take for example this scenario. I saw a huge racy bomber flying in front of me and the conterminous day, my neighbor won the drawing. Another day, I saw a Blue hoagie again and two days after that, an hazard happened in front of my house. Now, I see a Blue hoagy the trio time and I conclude that the Blue Heron is a sign of somet hing result happen. Nobody knows what will happen but I am sure that the sign means that something will happen because I see it in my minds eyes, my soul. My metaphysical pedagogy is that the Blue Heron is a sign that things will happen. It is akin saying that when we see a black cat, bad things will happen to us.For Wittgenstein, it does not have any sense to say that a note is a result of my learning of a Blue Heron or a bad plenty is the result of my seeing a black cat. He says that decrys like these run like a picture. Since it is very difficult to explain, let me explain it through and through an example. A subprogram of the united States, for example, is a picture that points to the land of the United States. The map shows that New York is more or less in the east side of the map and Washington is in the Western side of the map.If we are in the Central part of the United States and we want to go to Seattle, we will fly eastward. We will not fly westward because the map which pictures for us the location of Seattle ranges us that Seattle lies east of the United States. This is what Wittgenstein means when he says that there must be something identical in a picture and what it depicts (Wittgenstein 2.161). The map mimics the way reality is structured. It mimics the way the real locations in the US are placed beside each other.Language works like a picture. It tells us what the situation is. Wittgenstein says, We picture facts to ourselves (2.1). For him, the meaning of a statement is whatever it pictures. The meaning of the statement tells the situation of the world but like the picture, it can not tell us if it is actually true of false. When we make a statement for example and we feel that it is meaningful, what the sentence is doing is that it is just pointing to a possible situation in the reality but it may be true or false.When we say, for example that a Blue Heron causes things to happen like it is the cause of our neighbors winning in t he lottery or accident, the statements meaning pictures to us situations that can be true but we cannot be really sure because there is nothing in the sentence that makes it true. Wittgenstein says, In order to tell whether a picture is true or false we must compare it with reality (Wittgenstein, 2.223).If we apply this with the statement, The Blue Heron causes things to happen, things like winning a lottery or being the cause of spates car accident. A Blue Heron is a big bird that lazes around the shallow part of water. By definition, it has wings. It can fly. It has a beak, it can catch fish. It can walk for a few steps. It can swim. These are the capabilities of a Blue Heron. In reality, nothing in its definition or physical make-up can tell us that it can make a man win a lottery or be in a car accident.So the statement that The Blue Heron causes things to happen, things like winning a lottery or being the cause of peoples car accident does not have any sense. As Wittgenstein s ays, There is no indispensability making on thing happen because another has happened. The only prerequisite that exists is logical necessity (Wittegenstein 6.37). We can understand the statement but it is crocked if we analyze it following Wittgenstein.In the same way, Wittgenstein would say that it does not have any sense to talk about a soul or a good life. We do not know what a soul is. Nobody has seen a soul. Nobody has reported that he or she sees a soul getting out of the body of a someone who has just died. We cannot find a correspondence for the world soul in reality. We have a sign for soul but we do not have a denotative for the sign.When somebody dies and we say that he/she has lived a good life, it is also nonsensical. What is a good life to one is not automatically the good life to another. There is no unity referent for what the sign good life. It is also nonsensical when people at the funeral say about the dead person that lives were changed because of him. Agai n, value statements like these are subjective and are not verifiable. How can this statement be analyzed if there nothing that can be the referent for the sign. The referent has died. For Wittgenstein says, The world of the happy man is a different one from that of the joyless man. . . Soo too at death the world does not alter, but comes to an end (Wittgenstein 6.43-6.431).