Questions: Wittgenstein's Picture Theory of Language

Question 1

According to the Tractatus picture theory, how does the proposition 'aRb' (a stands in relation R to b) represent a possible state of affairs?

• A. It visually resembles the scene, like a painting depicts its subject
• B. It shares logical structure with the possible arrangement of objects a and b
• C. It abbreviates a longer empirical observation that speakers have agreed to use
• D. It names the relation R, which then refers to the state of affairs directly

Answer: (B)

The picture theory is about logical structure, not visual resemblance — this is the most common misreading. Just as a road map represents terrain because spatial relationships in the map mirror spatial relationships in the territory, 'aRb' pictures a fact because its elements (names) are arranged in a way that mirrors a possible arrangement of the objects. Wittgenstein explicitly distinguishes pictorial form (shared structure) from visual likeness.

Question 2

According to the Tractatus, which of the following propositions is meaningful in the technical sense?

• A. 'Cruelty is wrong' — it describes an ethical fact
• B. 'God exists' — it describes a metaphysical fact
• C. 'The cat is on the mat' — it pictures a possible state of affairs
• D. 'Courage is a virtue' — it describes a property of actions

Answer: (C)

In the Tractatus, a proposition is meaningful only if it pictures a possible state of affairs — a possible configuration of objects in the world. 'The cat is on the mat' can be true or false depending on how things are, so it genuinely pictures a possible fact. Ethical claims, theological claims, and value judgments cannot picture possible facts in this sense; they try to say what can at best be shown, or they say nothing at all. The famous closing line — 'Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent' — addresses exactly this.

Question 3

In the Tractatus, tautologies like 'Either it is raining or it is not raining' are meaningful propositions because they are typically true.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: False

Wittgenstein held that tautologies say nothing about the world — they are true under all possible conditions, which means they give no information about how things actually are. A meaningful proposition must be capable of being true in some circumstances and false in others. Tautologies show the structure of logic but make no factual claim; they are degenerate limiting cases of propositions, not paradigm examples of them.

Question 4

The Tractatus requires that for a proposition to picture a fact, the proposition and the fact must share logical form — not visual appearance.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: True

This is the non-obvious core of the theory. Wittgenstein illustrates this with the analogy of a musical score, a gramophone record, and the sound of music — they are all pictures of each other in that each shares the same logical-mathematical structure despite looking completely different. Representation is structural isomorphism, and that is why a sentence of words can picture a physical arrangement of objects.

Question 5

Why does the picture theory of language lead to the conclusion that the statements of the Tractatus itself are literally nonsensical?

Model answer: The Tractatus makes claims about the logical structure of language and its relationship to reality — but these are precisely the kind of claims the picture theory rules out as unsayable. A meaningful proposition must picture a possible state of affairs; claims about the limits of language, about logical form, about the nature of propositions do not picture possible facts. Wittgenstein acknowledges this at the end of the Tractatus: his propositions are like a ladder that must be thrown away after climbing it.

This self-undermining character is not a flaw Wittgenstein missed — he draws attention to it explicitly. The Tractatus is trying to gesture at limits of language that cannot be stated from inside language. Wittgenstein later described this as the book's fundamental error in a different sense, which drove his later philosophy. Understanding why the theory defeats itself shows genuine comprehension of what the theory claims.