Apparently, Wittgenstein walked away from philosophy after publication of the Tractatus. He thought he had solved the problems of philosophy, logic and reality.
In trying to ‘see’ Hodges’ model, in mathematical terms, there may be lessons in Wittegenstein’s approach, both in content and style. Of course, as a non-mathematician, I probably should leave well-alone; and stick to nursing. But that is the problem: from 1987-88 there is a need for a different perspective, even if this is a personal challenge. As with many ‘reviews’ here, we can look at Wittengenstein’s work, reflect upon it, and consider how it relates to the purposes, structures and content of Hodges’ model.
The Tractatus’s first line then, offers a warm welcome.
‘The world is everything that is the case.’ [I]
Making the decision to become a nurse and enrolling as a student makes you an educational and workforce demographic case.
Once a student in the university lecture theatre, you hopefully whether consciously, or not are exposed to the theory – practice gap; as you yearn to be on your first placement. Now it you who is seeking ‘cases’. As we live, and statistics roll and tally, the question of caseness (and categories) is key, one that is carried around even if not always active, recognised as such.
As noted in the previous post, we can for Hodges’ model (and other models, frameworks it must be said) think of ‘case’ as a, or the situation.
A mathematical approach to Hodges’ model involves looking at things, concepts, people as objects. This includes patients and carers. In terms of a project worthy of pursuing in nursing and other disciplines involved in healthcare, this mathematization presents a non-trivial challenge. A fully-deserved response would be: 'What have you done to the aptitude for care and caring attitude? You've cancelled - subtracted it!' Humour aside:
'In order to know an object, I must know not its external but all its internal qualities.' [2.01231]
Is this equivalent to us getting to know our patient / client and their socio-political context?
‘The way in which objects hang together in the atomic fact is the structure of the atomic fact.’ [2.032]
It is a help that Wittgenstein points to structure (crumbs of understanding are welcome here, as incremental steps). In formulating Hodges’ model we first identify the axes. It is the axes that then provide a space, four domains in total, to frame the objects that we decide; or, as the situation dictates, what concepts are placed in the domains of Hodges' model.
There is a successive series that follows, combining place, space and logic:
‘The proposition determines a place in logical space: the existence of this logical place is guaranteed by the existence of the constituent parts alone, by the existence of the significant proposition.’ [3.4]
‘The propositional sign and the logical coordinates : that is the logical place.’ [3.41]
‘The geometrical and the logical place agree in that each is the possibility of an existence.’ [3.411]
‘Although a proposition may only determine one place in logical space, the whole logical space must already be given by it.
(Otherwise denial, the logical sum, the logical product. etc., would always introduce new elements -in co-ordination.)
(The logical scaffolding round the picture determines the logical space. The proposition reaches through the whole logical space.)' [3.42]
While Wittgenstein came to view ‘the picture theory of meaning’ as incorrect, as a conceptual framework and diagrammatic resource Hodges’ model is closely tied to this form of representation.
Of course, the logic at work here, is far from mathematical, but there is surely a logic.
'Formal concepts cannot, like proper concepts, be presented by a function.' [4.126]
'There is therefore really a sense in which in philosophy we can talk of a non-psychological I.
The I occurs in philosophy through the fact that the "world is my world'".
The philosophical I is not the man, not the human body or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the limit - not a part of the world.' [5.641]
'Although the spots in our picture are geometrical figures, geometry can obviously say nothing about their actual form and position. But the network is purely geometrical, and all its properties can be given a priori.
Laws, like the law of causation, etc., treat of the network and not of what the network describes.' [6.35]
There is much more in this work, and much that remains a challenge. Many commentators have written and said in interviews that the Tractatus rewards re-reading and some sentences stay with you for life (The Great Philosophers BBC TV).
I'm still seeking mine.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf
orcid.org/0000-0002-0192-8965
