Reflections on a Prominent Argument in the Wittgenstein Debate
نویسنده
چکیده
Does the way authors treat their own works tell us something about how these works are to be understood? not necessarily. but then a standard argument against the “new Wittgenstein” comes under question. The argument is: the undogmatic interpretation of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus cannot be correct, since Wittgenstein himself later treats it as a work that holds certain positions. my response is: the argument is only correct if the answer to four specific questions is “yes.” The main purpose of the paper is to bring issues of philosophical authorship more into focus within Wittgensteinian interpretation.
منابع مشابه
Calls for Stricter Legislation and Fear in the European Immigrant Community: Reflections of the Public Charge Debate Ongoing in the United States; Comment on “A Crisis of Humanitarianism: Refugees at the Gates of Europe”
In the editorial, “A Crisis of Humanitarianism: Refugees at the Gates of Europe,” Marianna Fotaki elegantly highlights the changing dynamics of governmental policy toward refugees, forced migrants into Europe and the move away from the principles of humanitarianism.1 The perceived threats to economy, securi...
متن کامل-
To be an entrepreneurial university nowadays seems to be an attractive, convincing, modern vision for many higher education institutions and their leaders. The article goes through reflections on who will say what to whom when using the expression “entrepreneurial university” and it will show that there are at least four debates about entrepreneurial challenges to universities. The first deb...
متن کاملWittgenstein and the groundlessness of our believing
In his final notebooks, published as On Certainty, Wittgenstein offers a distinctive conception of the nature of reasons. Central to this conception is the idea that at the heart of our rational practices are essentially arational commitments. This proposal marks a powerful challenge to the standard picture of the structure of reasons. In particular, it has been thought that this account might ...
متن کاملRadical Contextualism
Philosophers inspired by Wittgenstein have been waging a guerrilla war against compositional, truth-conditional semantics (CTCS) since the rise to dominance of that approach to the study of meaning in the early 1970s. The neo-Wittgensteinian resistance involves two elements: first, a focus on the way our assessment of the truth conditions of sentences changes in various, seemingly open-ended wa...
متن کاملTractarian objects and logical categories
It has been much debated whether the Tractarian objects are what Russell would have called particulars or whether they include also properties and relations. This paper claims that the debate is misguided: there is no logical category such that Wittgenstein intended the reader of the Tractatus to understand his objects either as providing examples of or as not providing examples of that categor...
متن کامل