I see now that Wittgenstein came to the same conclusion of Hegel, and focused only on the core
of Hegel, the logic
of Hegel. It seems to me that the TLP is a transciption of absolute knowledge....and it's an utterly minimal
absolute knowledge but utterly central, and piercing absolute knowledge.
Wittgenstein is not only the square root of Hegel but Hegel reduced to a Euclidean point. I don't know if W read Hegel. He might have. But Wittgenstein wasn't the contingent type. None of that mattered to him.
Wittgenstein surpasses Beckett by far at the game of writing the un-writable. Wittgenstein is the philosophical version of the Black Painting. He reduces metaphysics to its hard digital core. Human logic is binary. Period. And this is what makes it dynamic. Just as Hegel saw. Their ontology is the same at the root, exactly the same!
They both got behind
the concept, and conceptualization itself. Man is not any thing, but rather the making of things...by which I mean concepts. Concepts can be the organization of qualia or also of other concepts. If one studies logic, one is already gazing at the fundamental ontology...for logic is tautology and negation, and nothing else. The rest is rules invented for convenience. Logarithms. Man understands tautology & contradiction intuitively, and this is the (inferred) structure of human thought itself. From these two ingrediants and qualia! which exists in transcendentally continuous space (Euclidean), entire cultures are formed. From math to language.
But all language is contingent, for tautologies are useless. And most of our useful language refers imperfectly to qualia or abstractions engendered from metaphor. Therefore W's ontology points to a necessity for pragmatism. Witt's ontology is mind-opening beautiful and numinous, but it cannot live one's life for them... It just radically frees the mind from self-imposed constraints...