So... what the fuck was Wittgenstein's point anyways?
>>810088
Philosophy is a disease yo
>>810136
Then what's the cure
>>810141
Philosophy.
Basically he used Western dualism and idealism as a scapegoat to push through his early positivist philosophy. Then he realized that the Americans had recently produced something even more crude and common-sense than positivism (pragmatism) and he used that to dismiss philosophy in favour of the everyday workman's approach to problems, albeit with his own peculiar brand of plebeian nihilism (christianity).
Throughout his career he used Nietzsche's intuitions about language, "Family Resemblance", as his main weapon. And considering that we already remarked that he took aim only at the "low-hanging fruit", it is quite funny that he took his Excalibur from so serious a source. Like a child using the big words his father said, to taunt the other children.
>>810210
>he took aim only at the "low-hanging fruit"
At the end of the day this is true.
The "low-hanging fruit" being poorly articulated forms of traditional language theories, that is. Augustine's theory of language is much more salvagable than Wittgenstein makes it out to be.
Analytic philosophy basically does the same thing to every doctrine from before the 20th century and outside of 19th century Anglo-American thought.
>Oh, this is unworkable because X
>But I didn't even mean X, you're not taking Y into consideration, and Z is the premise you should really be addressing
>But X
The most popular conclusion in analytic philosophy is "I don't know." This would be cute if it were still the age of Socratic skepticism.
>>810088
The West's greatest Sophist.
>>810088
Julius Evola blew him the fuck out.
>>810088
You can say things simply and say them well. The technical language of philosophy causes at least as much confusion as it reveals truth in the world.
>>812450
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism
>>810236
>This would be cute if it were still the age of Socratic skepticism
The thing is that Socratic skeptism actually had answers. What is justice? The sophists will tell you it's a relative term and the Platonist will tell you it's the shadow of the Form of Justice. The positivist will just poop their pants and say he can't understand the word and the pragmetic will say the question is too hard.
>>812477
>>
>The thing is that Socratic skeptism actually had answers. What is justice?
wait, what is justice for socrates ?
>>812647
the harmony of the soul and everyone doing what they are told, or some dumb shit like that
>>810088
Everybody in this thread is down on Witty, but his lecture on Freud was really good.
>>813135
Could you sum it up?
I'm usually a Witty fan but lately I've been turned off to autistic philosophy that isn't from ancient Athens.
>>810088
YU CANT NUW NUFFIN
>>813194
That's cool. Wittgenstein got me into the study of language but once I got into linguistics proper I found it much broader and richer than analytic philosophy, which I don't have much use for anymore.
Wittgenstein basically reinterprets Freud not as a scientist and theorist (which is how the Anglo world tended to see him, even if as a bad/fraudulent one) but as a (covert) rhetorician. Freud coined new metaphors for talking about mental phenomena, and given that much of mental life is approached through metaphor anyway, Wittenstein reads this as a significant contribution
I hate Freud for political reasons though.
>>813209
That makes sense. I also am not a big fan of Freud, maybe for similar reasons you are if that analysis of Freudianism appeals to you.
Wittgenstein's philosophy of language seems to be the only thing he's got. He's sort of a one-trick pony. Yeah, he invented truth tables, but beyond that it always seems to boil down to "Well, IS that mental event REALLY being referred to by this symbol?" or "Are you SURE that's the right rule?"
>>810088
>philosopher
>having a fucking point
>trying to get to that point in 2 gorillion words or less
>>813223
I don't know if I'd go that far. The Tractatus, for example, definitely draws a lot on Frege and things that were happening in logic at the time, but it's a statement on ethics and metaphysics just as much as on language per se.
After the 'fad' for philosophy of language in the 20th century (the list is pretty much inexhaustible - Wittgenstein, Russell, Tarski, Kripke, Putnam, Dummett, Austin, Chomsky, Quine, Searle, Davidson, Heidegger, Gadamer, Derrida, Foucault, Lacan, and so on) there's been a pretty big reaction against privileging language so much (eg Meillassoux, Badiou, Brassier, Harman) in the speculative realist 'movement' (not a movement so much but that's how it's talked about).
As a linguist I'd like to think that both linguistics and philosophy are best served by massively reducing the inflated status that language got in 20th century thought, while still acknowledging that it is a part of philosophy (certain issues are as old as Plato's 'Cratylus', for example).
>>813235
>I don't know if I'd go that far. The Tractatus, for example, definitely draws a lot on Frege and things that were happening in logic at the time, but it's a statement on ethics and metaphysics just as much as on language per se.
True, but he tried to distance himself from that later on.
>there's been a pretty big reaction against privileging language so much (eg Meillassoux, Badiou, Brassier, Harman) in the speculative realist 'movement' (not a movement so much but that's how it's talked about).
As an American the only one of these I've heard a good deal about is Badiou.
>
As a linguist I'd like to think that both linguistics and philosophy are best served by massively reducing the inflated status that language got in 20th century thought, while still acknowledging that it is a part of philosophy
I agree completely.
>>813233
It's SO ironic you're saying this about Wittgenstein.
You've obviously never read him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein
>Wittgenstein, his friend Paul Engelmann, and a team of architects developed a spare modernist house. In particular, Wittgenstein focused on the windows, doors, and radiators, demanding that every detail be exactly as he specified. When the house was nearly finished Wittgenstein had an entire ceiling raised 30mm so that the room had the exact proportions he wanted. Monk writes that "This is not so marginal as it may at first appear, for it is precisely these details that lend what is otherwise a rather plain, even ugly house its distinctive beauty."
>It took him a year to design the door handles and another to design the radiators. Each window was covered by a metal screen that weighed 150 kg, moved by a pulley Wittgenstein designed. Bernhard Leitner, author of The Architecture of Ludwig Wittgenstein, said there is barely anything comparable in the history of interior design: "It is as ingenious as it is expensive. A metal curtain that could be lowered into the floor."
...
>Monk writes that Wittgenstein found it intolerable that a war was going on and he was teaching philosophy. He grew angry when any of his students wanted to become professional philosophers.
...
>He started working at Guy's shortly afterwards as a dispensary porter, meaning that he delivered drugs from the pharmacy to the wards—where he apparently advised the patients not to take them.
>The hospital staff were not told he was one of the world's most famous philosophers, though some of the medical staff did recognize him—at least one had attended Moral Sciences Club meetings—but they were discreet. "Good God, don't tell anybody who I am!" Wittgenstein begged one of them. Some of them nevertheless called him Professor Wittgenstein, and he was allowed to dine with the doctors.
>>813309
>When the house was nearly finished Wittgenstein had an entire ceiling raised 30mm so that the room had the exact proportions he wanted. Monk writes that "This is not so marginal as it may at first appear, for it is precisely these details that lend what is otherwise a rather plain, even ugly house its distinctive beauty."
This is just one of those bullshit things people do to seem eccentric.
>>813322
>>It took him a year to design the door handles and another to design the radiators. Each window was covered by a metal screen that weighed 150 kg, moved by a pulley Wittgenstein designed. Bernhard Leitner, author of The Architecture of Ludwig Wittgenstein, said there is barely anything comparable in the history of interior design: "It is as ingenious as it is expensive. A metal curtain that could be lowered into the floor."
No matter what, this seems like a significant feat of engineering. Then again I don't know anything about designing houses.
>>813278
No. I've read a lot of Batman comics, does that count?
>>812426
Julius Evola is overrated and is just a meme. Also, Evola was an arrogant blabber mouth.
>>813732
>calling someone overrated in a Wittgenstein thread
epic meme
>>810210
The author of this post is doing his damndest to come off as much smarter than he actually is.
>>813732
Evola is as overrated as Wittgenstein? So they both make numerous valid points but have vocal fanbases that give them bad images in the minds of plebs, who then perpetuate misunderstandings about their epistemologies and perspectives on language & religion?
