Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus · Chapter
6.372 explained
Wittgenstein criticizes the modern tendency to treat natural laws as ultimate, unassailable givens, comparing it to the ancients' reliance on God and Fate.
What happens
Wittgenstein criticizes the modern tendency to treat natural laws as ultimate, unassailable givens, comparing it to the ancients' reliance on God and Fate. He notes that while both positions are right and wrong, the ancients were clearer in acknowledging a definite terminus, whereas modern science creates the illusion that everything is explained.
Free preview opens on this chapter — companions, themes, and character notes appear beside the text.
Narrative arc
Story tension across the book — this chapter sits in Falling action.
- Setup
- Escalation
- Breaking point
- Aftermath
- Closing
This passage marks the story’s dramatic climax because it presents the moment when the protagonist’s obsessive…
Full beat labels and climax notes unlock in the reader.
Follow the arc while readingThemes in this chapter
- Critique of Traditional Philosophy
Wittgenstein critiques the modern philosophical stance that treats natural laws as ultimate, unassailable explanations, paralleling ancient reliance on God and Fate.
Key passages
“So people stop short at natural laws as something unassailable, as did the ancients at God and Fate.”
People treat natural laws as unquestionable final explanations, just as the ancients treated God and Fate.
Wittgenstein draws a parallel between modern scientific dogma and ancient religious dogma.
“And they are both right and wrong. But the ancients were clearer, in so far as they recognized one clear terminus, whereas the modern system makes it appear as though everything were explained.”
Both views have truth and error, but the ancients were more honest in acknowledging a definite stopping point, while modern science falsely suggests complete explanation.
Wittgenstein prefers the ancient clarity of a single terminus over the modern illusion of total explanation.
