6.5 Zu einer Antwort, die man nicht

6.5 Zu einer Antwort, die man nicht aussprechen kann, kann man auch die Frage nicht aussprechen. Das Rätsel gibt es nicht.
Wenn sich eine Frage überhaupt stellen läßt, so kann sie auch beantwortet werden.

6.51 Skeptizismus ist nicht unwiderleglich, sondern offenbar unsinnig, wenn er bezweifeln will, wo nicht gefragt werden kann.
Denn Zweifel kann nur bestehen, wo eine Frage besteht; eine Frage nur, wo eine Antwort besteht, und diese nur, wo etwas gesagt werden kann.

6.52 Wir fühlen, daß, selbst wenn alle möglichen wissenschaftlichen Fragen beantwortet sind, unsere Lebensprobleme noch gar nicht berührt sind. Freilich bleibt dann eben keine Frage mehr; und eben dies ist die Antwort.

6.521 Die Lösung des Problems des Lebens merkt man am Verschwinden dieses Problems.
(Ist nicht dies der Grund, warum Menschen, denen der Sinn des Lebens nach langen Zweifeln klar wurde, warum diese dann nicht sagen konnten, worin dieser Sinn bestand?)

6.522 Es gibt allerdings Unaussprechliches. Dies zeigt sich, es ist das Mystische.

6.53 Die richtige Methode der Philosophie wäre eigentlich die: Nichts zu sagen, als was sich sagen läßt, also Sätze der Naturwissenschaft - also etwas, was mit Philosophie nichts zu tun hat -, und dann immer, wenn ein anderer etwas Metaphysisches sagen wollte, ihm nachzuweisen, daß er gewissen Zeichen in seinen Sätzen keine Bedeutung gegeben hat. Diese Methode wäre für den anderen unbefriedigend - er hätte nicht das Gefühl, daß wir ihn Philosophie lehrten - aber sie wäre die einzig streng richtige.

結果 (英語) 1:

6.5 to an answer that you can not pronounce, you can also ask not pronounce. the riddle does not exist.
If a question can be put at all, then it can also be answered.

6:51 Scepticism is not irrefutable, but obviously nonsensical, when he wants to be doubted, where no questions can be asked.
Because doubt can exist only where a question exists;a question only where an answer exists, and this only where something can be said.

6:52 we feel that even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, our living problems are not even touched. however, there is then no wonder more, and this itself is the answer.

6,521, the solution of the problem of life you realize at this problems disappear.
(Is not this the reason why people, where the meaning of life after long doubt realized why could not then say wherein this sense consisted?)
6522
however, there is unspeakable. this is evident, it is the mystical.

6.53 the right method of philosophy would be really this: to say nothing except what can be saidThus, principles of natural science - ie something that has nothing to do with philosophy - and then always, when another wanted to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he has given certain signs in his principles no importance. This method would be unsatisfying to the other - he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy - but they would be the only strictly correct.

結果 (英語) 2:

6.5 To a response that you can't pronounce, you can't pronounce the question. There is no mystery.
If you make a question at all, so she can be answered too.

6.51 Skepticism is not unwiderleglich, but apparently nonsensical, if he wants to doubt where can not be asked.
Because only doubt, where there is a question; a question only, where there is an answer, and that only where something can be said.

6.52. We feel that even if all possible scientific questions are answered, our life's problems are not even touched. But then no question more; and this is the answer.

You can tell 6.521 the solution of the problem of life on the disappearance of this problem.
(This is the reason why people, the meaning of life became clear after long doubt why they then could say, what was this sense?)

6.522 There but unspeakable. This is evident, it is the mystical.

6.53 Would actually the correct method of philosophy: nothing to say as what to say. so sets of science - something, which has nothing to do with philosophy, and then whenever someone else wanted to say something metaphysical him to prove that he gave no importance to certain characters in his sets. This method would be unsatisfactory for the other – he would not have the feeling that we philosophy taught him - but it would be the only strictly correct.

結果 (英語) 3:

6.5 to an answer, which one cannot express, one cannot express also the question. The mystery does not give it.
Wenn a question at all to place lets itself, then it can be also answered.

6.51 skepticism is not irrefutable, but obviously unreasonable, if he wants to doubt, where cannot be asked.
Denn doubt can only exist, where a question exists;a question only, where an answer exists, and these only, where something can be said.

6.52 we feel that, even if all possible scientific questions are answered our life problems are still not at all affected. Certainly then just no more question remains; and just this is the answer. One notices

6.521 the solution of the problem of the life at the disappearance of this problem.
(This is not the reason, why humans, who became clear the sense of the life after long doubts, could not say why these then, wherein this sense lay?)

6.522 it gives however inexpressible. This shows up, it is the mystical.

6.53 the correct method of philosophy would actually be: To say nothing, when which lets itself say,thus sets of the natural science - thus something that does not have to do with philosophy anything -, to prove and always if another something metaphysical say it wanted to it that it did not give a meaning to certain indications in its sentences. This method would be for the other one unsatisfactorily - it would not have the feeling that we taught it philosophy - however it would be the only strictly correct.