Wittgenstein on Logic as the Method of Philosophy

Author(s):  
Oskari Kuusela

This book is an examination of Wittgenstein’s early and late philosophies of logic in relation to accounts of logic and its philosophical significance in early and middle analytic philosophy, with particular reference to Frege, Russell, Carnap, and Strawson. It argues that not only the early but also the later Wittgenstein sought to further develop the logical-philosophical approaches of Frege and Russell. Throughout his career Wittgenstein’s aim was to resolve problems with and address the limitations of Frege’s and Russell’s accounts of logic and their logical methodologies so as to achieve the philosophical progress that originally motivated the logical-philosophical approach. By re-examining the roots and development of analytic philosophy, the book seeks to open up covered-up paths for the further development of analytic philosophy. It explains how Wittgenstein extends logical methodology beyond calculus-based logical methods and how his novel account of the status of logic enables one to do justice to the complexity and richness of language use and thought while retaining rigour and ideals of logic such as simplicity and exactness. The book also outlines the new kind of non-empiricist naturalism developed in Wittgenstein’s later work as well as explaining how Wittgenstein’s account of logic can be used to dissolve the longstanding methodological dispute between the ideal and ordinary language schools of analytic philosophy.

Author(s):  
Oskari Kuusela

Gottlob Frege and Bertand Russell are widely regarded as the founders of analytic philosophy. A longer list also includes G. E. Moore and Ludwig Wittgenstein. This is not because analytic philosophers subscribe to Frege’s and Russell’s views about particular philosophical matters. It is hard to think of examples of such agreed-upon views. Rather, Frege’s and Russell’s role as founders is due, before all, to certain methodological ideas which they introduced. Especially important in this regard is the idea that philosophical progress could be achieved by means of the methods of symbolic or mathematical logic to whose development both contributed in important ways. This book, in essence, is an examination of Frege’s and Russell’s methodological and logical ideas and their further development and transformation by certain other philosophers, especially Ludwig Wittgenstein, but also Rudolf Carnap and Peter Strawson. It is in this sense a book on methodology in analytic philosophy. And although the book assumes the form of the examination of the history of analytic philosophy, especially the work of Wittgenstein, it is just as much—or more—about the future of analytic philosophy. The underlying question that motivates this book is what analytic philosophy could be or become, and whether it is possible for it to redeem its original promise of progress. For it seems fair to say that progress has been less impressive than Russell promised and more controversial than he may have expected (see ...


Author(s):  
Oskari Kuusela

This chapter addresses the long-standing dispute on logic and philosophical methodology between the so-called ideal and ordinary language schools of analytic philosophy, and proposes a resolution to it. While the ideal language school emphasizes the importance of the simplicity and exactness of concepts for philosophical clarity, the ordinary language school regards it as crucial to philosophy to clarify the concepts and the uses of natural language in their actual complexity, viewing emphasis on simplicity and exactness as misguided. For the ideal language school this, again, comes across as a dismissal of good scientific methodology. The proposed resolution draws on the later Wittgenstein’s account of idealization in logic, from the point of view of which the notion of relevance is crucial for understanding the completeness of philosophical accounts. This enables us to satisfy simultaneously the different requirements of the two schools for an adequate method, explaining how one can both meet the ideals of simplicity and exactness in logical clarification and acknowledge the complexity of the concepts and uses of natural language. The last section compares Wittgensteinian clarificatory models with Carnapian explications, and explains the benefits of the former over the latter.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 122-130
Author(s):  
Ha Ngan Ngo ◽  
Maya Khemlani David

Vietnam represents a country with 54 ethnic groups; however, the majority (88%) of the population are of Vietnamese heritage. Some of the other ethnic groups such as Tay, Thai, Muong, Hoa, Khmer, and Nung have a population of around 1 million each, while the Brau, Roman, and Odu consist only of a hundred people each. Living in northern Vietnam, close to the Chinese border (see Figure 1), the Tay people speak a language of the    Central    Tai language group called Though, T'o, Tai Tho, Ngan, Phen, Thu Lao, or Pa Di. Tay remains one of 10 ethnic languages used by 1 million speakers (Buoi, 2003). The Tày ethnic group has a rich culture of wedding songs, poems, dance, and music and celebrate various festivals. Wet rice cultivation, canal digging and grain threshing on wooden racks are part of the Tày traditions. Their villages situated near the foothills often bear the names of nearby mountains, rivers, or fields. This study discusses the status and role of the Tày language in Northeast Vietnam. It discusses factors, which have affected the habitual use of the Tay language, the connection between language shift and development and provides a model for the sustainability and promotion of minority languages. It remains fundamentally imperative to strengthen and to foster positive attitudes of the community towards the Tày language. Tày’s young people must be enlightened to the reality their Tày non-usage could render their mother tongue defunct, which means their history stands to be lost.


Author(s):  
Didier Fassin

If punishment is not what we say it is, if it is not justified by the reasons we invoke, if it facilitates repeat offenses instead of preventing them, if it punishes in excess of the seriousness of the act, if it sanctions according to the status of the offender rather than to the gravity of the offense, if it targets social groups defined beforehand as punishable, and if it contributes to producing and reproducing disparities, then does it not itself precisely undermine the social order? And must we not start to rethink punishment, not only in the ideal language of philosophy and law but also in the uncomfortable reality of social inequality and political violence?


Author(s):  
DANIEL STOLJAR

Abstract Bernard Williams argues that philosophy is in some deep way akin to history. This article is a novel exploration and defense of the Williams thesis (as I call it)—though in a way anathema to Williams himself. The key idea is to apply a central moral from what is sometimes called the analytic philosophy of history of the 1960s to the philosophy of philosophy of today, namely, the separation of explanation and laws. I suggest that an account of causal explanation offered by David Lewis may be modified to bring out the way in which this moral applies to philosophy, and so to defend the Williams thesis. I discuss in detail the consequences of the thesis for the issue of philosophical progress and note also several further implications: for the larger context of contemporary metaphilosophy, for the relation of philosophy to other subjects, and for explaining, or explaining away, the belief that success in philosophy requires a field-specific ability or brilliance.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 519-548
Author(s):  
Robert Nicolaï

This paper is a linguistic, anthropological and philosophical exploration of language, with particular focus on language contact. The goal is not to address linguistic phenomena from a descriptive perspective, in the classical sense of the term, nor as if they were a “given”, and nothing further. Nor is the goal to craft a model. Instead it is an attempt to account for all relevant elements which (empirically) come into play in ordinary language use, considering them both in terms of language dynamics and in terms of language usage; this necessarily entails taking into consideration our own practices, as actors of communication and as builders of knowledge. We are ever stakeholders in this play (and its plays) because we are the ones who identify and/or attribute relevance. In other words, this text is a reflection on the (our) frameworks established through communication practices (frameworks which naturally have an impact on the form of our tools, including languages!) It highlights that the objectivization of phenomena which underlies our practices (whether academic or not) is closely dependent on the means by which we grasp the phenomena—this is nothing new but is worth noting afresh. Methodologically speaking, observing this point is an essential element in the elaboration of a theory to account for how phenomena are empirically grasped, and more particularly what it entails in the field of ‘language contact’.


Philosophy ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 82 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-233
Author(s):  
John W. Cook

Wittgenstein has often been criticized, and even dismissed, for being a patron of ordinary language, a champion of the vernacular, a defender of the status quo. One critic has written: ‘When Wittgenstein set up the actual use of language as a standard, that was equivalent to accepting a certain set up of culture and belief as a standard … It is lucky no such philosophy was thought of until recently or we should still be under the sway of witch doctors …’ In what follows I want to show just how wide of the mark criticisms of this sort are.


Terminology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-34
Author(s):  
Maria-Cornelia Wermuth

Abstract This paper deals with collaborative terminological activities in the biomedical field. Efficient communication based on uniform language use is a prerequisite for safe and cost-efficient patient care. Terminological consistency and standardization are therefore central issues in healthcare with high societal relevance. The objectives of this contribution are (1) to show how actors from different disciplines and institutions are involved in the standardization of medical terminology and electronic terminology systems; (2) to describe how translation-oriented terminological principles affect the translation of the Systematic Nomenclature of Medicine – Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT). The challenges of this approach will be discussed and some suggestions for its further development will be made.


Author(s):  
Mikael Rothstein

This chapter deals with sacred biographies, hagiographies, and their function in the formation of religious leaders and ritually venerated persons. It is argued that the status of any Master, Teacher, Prophet, guru, Seer and Channel is partly based on sacred biographies, and that the narrative construction of religious authority is crucial to our understanding of leadership in new religions, sects etc. Distinctions are made between doctrinal and popular hagiographies; doctrinal narratives promote the exalted leader according to theologically well-defined standards, while popular narratives cover a wider span, as they seek to draw a picture of the perfected human in many different ways. Counter-hagiographies, finally, serve to deconstruct the ideal person and are typically employed by ex-devotees or members of counter-groups. Hagiographies are seen as very ancient social strategies (there are references to old new religions including early Christianity and the cult of Christ), but also a very lively and important mechanisms in the current make of religious leaders. Examples are derived from Catholic cults of saints, the Mormon Church, Scientology, TM and several other groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document