Remarks on Colour, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Edited by G.E.M. Anscombe, Translated into English by Linda L. McAlister and Margarete Schattle, University of California Press, 1977.

But pure yellow too is lighter than pure, saturated red, or blue. And is this proposition a matter of experience? -- I dont know, for example, whether red (i.e., pure red) is lighter or darker than blue; to be able to say, I would have to see them. And yet, if I had seen them, I would know the answer once and for all, like th e result of an arithmetical calculation.

Aber auch das reine Gelb ist heller als das reine, satte Rot, oder Blau. Und ist dies ein Satz der Erfahrung? - Ich weiS z.B. nicht, ob Rot (d.h. das reine) heller oder dunkler ist als Blau; ich muSte sie sehen, um es sagen zu konnen. Und doch, wennich es gesehen hatte, so wuste ich's nun ein fur alle mal, wie das Resultat einer Rechnung.

Where do we draw the line here between logic and experience?

Wo trennen sich hier Logik und Erfahrung (Empirie)?

My feeling is that blue obliterates yellow, -- but why shouldn't I call a somewhat greenish yellow a "blu ish yellow" and green an intermediary colour between blue and yellow, and a strongly blush green and somewhat yellowish blue?

Meinum Gefuhl nach loscht Blau das Gelb aus, -- aber warum solte ich nicht ein etwas grunliches Gelb ein "blauliches Gelb" nennen und Grun eine Zwischenfarbe von Blau und Gelb, und ein stark blauliches Grun ein etwas gelbliches Blau?

What advantage would someone have over me who knew a direct route from blue to yellow? And what shows that I don't know such a path? --Does everything depend on my range of possible language-ga mes with the form "...ish?"

Was hatte Einer vor mir voraus, der ennen direkten Farbenweg zwischen Blau und Gelb kennte? Und wie zeigt es sich, das ich so einen Weg nicht kenne? - Liegt alles an den mir moglichen Sprachspi elen mit der Form "...lich"?

Robot Script V:

The child was not at all precocious in his intellectual development.

At the age of one and a half he could say only a few comprehensive words; he could also make use of a number of sounds which expressed a meaning intelligible to those around him.

He was, however, on good terms with his parents and their one servant-girl, and tributes were paid to his being a "good boy".

He did not disturb his parents at night, he conscientiously obeyed orders not to touch certain things or go into certain rooms, and above all he never cried when his mother left him for a few hours.

At the same time, he was greatly attached to his mother, who had not only fed him herself but had also looked after him without any outside help. This good little boy, however, had an occasional disturbing habit of taking any small objects he could get h old of and throwing them away from him into a corner, under the bed, and so on, so that hunting for his toys and picking them up was often quite a business.

As he did this he gave vent to a loud, long-drawn-out "o-o-o-o", accompanied by an expression of interest and satisfaction. His mother [and I] were agreed in thinking that this was not a mere interjection but represented the German word "fort" ["gone"]. I eventually realized that it was a game and that the only use he made of any of his toys was to play "gone" with them.

One day I made an observation which confirmed my view. The child had a wooden reel with a piece of string tied around it. It never occurred to him to pull it along the floor behind him, for instance, and play at its being a carriage. What he did was to hold the reel by the string and very skillfully throw it over the edge of his curtained cot, so that it disappeared into it, at the same time uttering his expressive "o-o-o-o". He then pulled the reel out of the cot again by the string and hailed its re appearance with a joyful "da" ["there"].

This, then, was the complete game - disappearance and return. As a rule one only witnessed its first act, which was repeated untiringly as a game in itself, thought there is no doubt that the greater pleasure was attached to the second act.

The Interpretation of the game then became obvious. It was related to the child's great cultural achievement - the instinctual renunciation (that is, the renunciation of instinctual satisfaction) which he had made in allowing his mother to go away withou t protesting. He compensated himself for this, as it were, by himself staging the disappearance and return of the objects within his reach.