Writegenstein #8: Examples Over Evidence

A main cause of philosophical disease – a one-sided diet: one nourishes one’s thinking with only one kind of example.

-Ludwig Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations, 593)

We already know that sufficient proof is never in empirical observation, but perhaps it is not in the form of the argument either. Sure, logical form gives an argument structure so that it can sustain itself, and that is arguably what is most important (some of us can think in pure conceptual terms, and others simply cannot, we must accept) but proof is not exactly that sort of thing. Rather, proof shows how an argument which is true is true or how an argument which is false is false, and this is done through example.

One will not be very convincing if he can only apply the form of his argument to one kind of example – one category – in which he simply substitutes different objects for the variables contained within the argument form. Different examples are shown through different areas of reference. This requires sufficient nuanced knowledge of two or more areas, and perhaps that is hard to come by, for different areas of study have their own unique vocabularies and require some degree of subjective interest in order to learn. Regardless, if a concept is true, it should have some universal degree of truth to it so that the form of the argument transcends the material realm and therefore can be applied in any observable context. Therefore, there should be no limit to the number of examples one could come up with to show the thrust of the argument.