The Second Step to the Proof Is Contingency

The way Wittgenstein puts it is the negation or contradictory, the proposition asserted is not a self-contradictory proposition. But that doesn't mean we can't know them to be true, right? He wants to say that saying whether something is possible depends on the speaker. So I could still actually give an interpretation of that. Well, if the speaker already knows that it is happened, that it is true, then it's not possible for that speaker to truthfully say that it could be false. It's not possible. The second step to the proof is contingency doesn't imply that it was possible that the proposition was false because of the previous step, which I showed