Wittgenstein, Ludwig Josef Johann (1889–1951)

Author(s):  
Jane Heal

Ludwig Wittgenstein was born in Vienna on 26 April 1889 and died in Cambridge on 29 April 1951. He spent his childhood and youth in Austria and Germany, studied with Russell in Cambridge from 1911 to 1914 and worked again in Cambridge (with some interruptions) from 1929 to 1947. His first book, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, was published in 1921. It presents a logical atomist picture of reality and language. The world consists of a vast number of independent facts, each of which is in turn composed of some combination of simple objects. Each object has a distinctive logical shape which fits it to combine only with certain other objects. These objects are named by the basic elements of language. Each name has the same logical shape, and so the same sort of possibilities of combination, as the object it names. An elementary sentence is a combination of names and if it is true it will be a picture of the isomorphic fact formed by the combination of the named objects. Ordinary sentences, however, are misleading in their surface form and need to be analysed before we can see the real complexity implicit in them. Other important ideas in the Tractatus are that these deep truths about the nature of reality and representation cannot properly be said but can only be shown. Indeed Wittgenstein claimed that pointing to this distinction was central to his book. And he embraced the paradoxical conclusion that most of the Tractatus itself is, strictly, nonsense. He also held that other important things can also be shown but not said, for example, about there being a certain truth in solipsism and about the nature of value. The book is brief and written in a simple and elegant way. It has inspired writers and musicians as well as being a significant influence on logical positivism. After the Tractatus Wittgenstein abandoned philosophy until 1929, and when he returned to it he came to think that parts of his earlier thought had been radically mistaken. His later ideas are worked out most fully in the Philosophical Investigations, published in 1953. One central change is from presenting language as a fixed and timeless framework to presenting it as an aspect of vulnerable and changeable human life. Wittgenstein came to think that the idea that words name simple objects was incoherent, and instead introduced the idea of ‘language games’. We teach language to children by training them in practices in which words and actions are interwoven. To understand a word is to know how to use it in the course of the projects of everyday life. We find our ways of classifying things and interacting with them so natural that it may seem to us that they are necessary and that in adopting them we are recognizing the one and only possible conceptual scheme. But if we reflect we discover that we can at least begin to describe alternatives which might be appropriate if certain very general facts about the world were different or if we had different interests. A further aspect of the change in Wittgenstein’s views is the abandonment of solipsism. On the later view there are many selves, aware of and co-operating with each other in their shared world. Wittgenstein explores extensively the nature of our psychological concepts in order to undermine that picture of ‘inner’ and ‘outer’ which makes it so difficult for us to get a satisfactory solution to the so-called ‘mind–body problem’. Although there are striking contrasts between the earlier and later views, and Wittgenstein is rightly famous for having developed two markedly different philosophical outlooks, there are also continuities. One of them is Wittgenstein’s belief that traditional philosophical puzzles often arise from deeply gripping but misleading pictures of the workings of language. Another is his conviction that philosophical insight is not to be gained by constructing quasi-scientific theories of puzzling phenomena. Rather it is to be achieved, if at all, by seeking to be intellectually honest and so to neutralize the sources of confusion.

Author(s):  
Jane Heal

Ludwig Wittgenstein was born in Vienna on 26 April 1889 and died in Cambridge on 29 April 1951. He spent his childhood and youth in Austria and Germany, studied with Russell in Cambridge from 1911 to 1914 and worked again in Cambridge (with some interruptions) from 1929 to 1947. His first book, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, was published in German in 1921 and in English translation in 1922. It presents a logical atomist picture of reality and language. The world consists of a vast number of independent facts, each of which is in turn composed of some combination of simple objects. Each object has a distinctive logical shape which fits it to combine only with certain other objects. These objects are named by the basic elements of language. Each name has the same logical shape, and so the same pattern of possibilities of combination, as the object it names. An elementary sentence is a combination of names and if it is true it will be a picture of the isomorphic fact formed by the combination of the named objects. Ordinary sentences, however, are misleading in their surface form and need to be analysed before we can see the real complexity implicit in them. Other important ideas in the Tractatus are that these deep truths about the nature of reality and representation cannot properly be said but can only be shown. Indeed Wittgenstein claimed that pointing to this distinction was central to his book. And he embraced the paradoxical conclusion that most of the Tractatus itself is, strictly, nonsense. He also held that other important things can also be shown but not said, for example, about there being a certain truth in solipsism and about the nature of value. The book is brief and written in a simple and elegant way. It has inspired writers and musicians as well as being a significant influence on logical positivism. After the Tractatus Wittgenstein abandoned philosophy until 1929, and when he returned to it he came to think that parts of his earlier thought had been radically mistaken. His later ideas are worked out most fully in the Philosophical Investigations, published in 1953. One central change is from presenting language as a fixed and timeless framework to presenting it as an aspect of vulnerable and changeable human life. Wittgenstein came to think that the idea that words name simple objects was incoherent, and instead introduced the idea of ‘language games’. We teach language to children by training them in practices in which words and actions are interwoven. To understand a word is to know how to use it in the course of the projects of everyday life. We find our ways of classifying things and interacting with them so natural that it may seem to us that they are necessary and that in adopting them we are recognizing the one and only possible conceptual scheme. But if we reflect we discover that we can at least begin to describe alternatives which might be appropriate if certain very general facts about the world were different or if we had different interests. A further aspect of the change in Wittgenstein’s views is the abandonment of sympathy with solipsism. On the later view there are many selves, aware of and co-operating with each other in their shared world. Wittgenstein explores extensively the nature of our psychological concepts in order to undermine that picture of ‘inner’ and ‘outer’ which makes it so difficult for us to get a satisfactory solution to the so-called ‘mind-body problem’. Although there are striking contrasts between the earlier and later views, and Wittgenstein is rightly famous for having developed two markedly different philosophical outlooks, there are also continuities. One of them is Wittgenstein’s belief that traditional philosophical puzzles often arise from deeply gripping but misleading pictures of the workings of language. Another is his conviction that philosophical insight is not to be gained by constructing quasi-scientific theories of puzzling phenomena. Rather it is to be achieved, if at all, by seeking to be intellectually honest and so to neutralize the sources of confusion.


REFLEXE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (60) ◽  
pp. 29-63
Author(s):  
Martin Rabas

The present article has two objectives. One is to elucidate the philosophical approach presented in the so-called Strahov Systematic Manuscripts of Jan Patočka in terms of consciousness and nature. The other is to compare this philosophical approach with Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s theses on nature, as elaborated in 1956–1961, and to point out some advantages and limitations of both approaches. In our opinion, Patočka’s philosophical approach consists, on the one hand, in a descriptive analysis of human experience, which he understands as a pre-reflective self-relationship pointing towards the consciousness of the world. On the other hand, on the basis of this descriptive analysis Patočka consequently explicates all non-human life, inorganic matter, and finally the whole of nature as life in its own right, the essence of which is also a certain self-relation with a tendency towards consciousness. The article then briefly presents Merleau-Ponty’s theses on nature, and finally compares them with Patočka’s overall theses on nature. The advantage of Patočka’s notion of nature as against Merleau-Ponty’s is that, in Patočka’s view, nature encompasses both the principle of unity and individuality. On the other hand, the advantage of Merleau-Ponty’s understanding of nature as against Patočka’s lies in the consistent interconnectedness of the infinite life of nature and the finite life of individual beings.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 85
Author(s):  
Abdullah Aydın

“Go to temples of science and ideas of Europe. Imitate the Tugendbund, ‘the Union of Virtue’, of which thousands of German youth are the members. Always keep the rule of ‘Fit soul is in fit body’ in mind” (Petrov, 2013, p. 72). This study aimed to show the similarities, in terms of expression, emphasis, and implication, in the about/mission/vision/goals/objectives of various science centers from around the world and in the basic themes derived from Snellman’s statement above, namely, Science for all, Science Centers for all, and Human welfare that he made as a challenge to not only his people but to everyone. Document and content analyses were applied in the study. Within the scope of these analyses, this study investigated the about/mission/vision/goals/objectives sections of websites of science centers from around the world (Asia, Europe, Global, Latin America/The Caribbean, North America, Africa). From this investigation, similar basic themes, derived from Snellman’s statement challenging his people/everyone to adopt this devotion to science, were found in the areas of i) expression in ASTC, CIMUSET/CSTM, CASC and SAASTEC; ii) emphasis in ECSITE, ASDC, ASCN and NSCF; and iii) implication in ASPAC, ASTEN, NCSM, ABCMC and Red-POP. These basic themes, as found in the about/mission/vision/goals/objectives of science centers, can, in effect, be narrowed down to the one theme of “cultural institutions will be a big part of human life” (Madsen 2017, p. 68) science centers in the global village (Touraine, 2016, p. 121) of the future.


Author(s):  
Alexander Noyon ◽  
Thomas Heidenreich

This chapter introduces five central concepts of existential philosophy in order to deduce ethical principles for psychotherapy: phenomenology, authenticity, paradoxes, isolation, and freedom vs. destiny. Phenomenological perspectives are useful as a guideline for how to encounter and understand patients in terms of individuality and uniqueness. Existential communication as a means to search and face the truth of one’s existence is considered as a valid basis for an authentic life. Paradoxes that cannot be solved are characteristic for human existence and should be dealt with to turn resignation into active choices. Isolation is one of the “existentials” characterizing human life between two paradox poles: On the one hand we are deeply in need of relationships to other human beings; on the other hand we are thrown into the world alone and will always stay like this, no matter how close we get to another person. Further, addressing freedom and destiny as two extremes of one dimension can serve as a basis for orientation in life and also for dealing with the separation between responsibility and guilt.


2013 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-90
Author(s):  
Regine Kather

Humans are, as Cassirer has demonstrated, an animal symbolicum that interprets the world by means of signs. Since the second half of the 20 th century the relation of cultures is influenced strongly by modern technology: On the one hand, nearly every culture is longing for modern technology to achieve a more comfortable life; and, on the other, modern technology changes the way of life deeply. At first sight technology seems to be a neutral instrument, a mere tool that is compatible with every way of life and does not interfere into religious and ethical orientation. But it is definitely an expression of cultural values; it produces completely new wishes and hopes and undermines inevitably traditional forms of life – a process, which implies great dangers and opportunities. First, humans must reflect on their way of life consciously and decide autonomously between alternatives; secondly the growing social standard leads to the destruction of nature which is the basis of human life. Though living in different cultures, humans have the ethical obligation to preserve nature – for their own and nature‟s sake.


2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-49
Author(s):  
Ilija Kajtez

In this paper, the author considers the enterprise of fasting, in which the man faces the important issues of his existence, the purpose and worldly life. The author is aware that all social, philosophical and theological phenomena are very complex, profound and obscure and quotes the French philosopher and scientist Pascal, who claimed: ?We do not possess enough knowledge to?understand the life of human body?While in nature everything is closely intertwined ? No part can be recognized unless we have studied the unit. The life of each body will be understood only when we learn all that it needs; and in order to achieve this, it is necessary to study the universe. But the universe is infinite and it is beyond the human ability to grasp it??It is clear from this quotation that we are facing many complex issues whenever we try to reveal one of the secrets of Christian life - the secret of fasting. The second part of the essay has to do with people and the time we live in, the relations between believing doctors and their profession and whether and to what extent a believing doctor who observes fasts is closer to the Truth and Goodness that the one who does not believe. The author argues that the doctor who is a believer and who observes a fast seeing it as the time when values of human life should be put to test and the meaning of medical profession reconsidered is closer to the truth of Existence and love of the world. There is no duty that is more important for a modern, egotistic, materialistic man than resuming fasts. A fast as a profound rethinking of the whole of a human being, as a human effort, as Solzhenitsyn would say, to self-restriction, abstinence, nurturing of his own freedom.


Author(s):  
Mohammad Hossein Besharati ◽  
Golnar Mazdayasna ◽  
Sayed Mohammad Anoosheh

The beginning of twentieth century was accompanied with the prevailing current of technology in different aspects of human life. At first, it incited a positive stimulus which could build a utopian world on the advancement of technology. However, the bloody World Wars averted this view and the technological utopia was replaced by Orwellian dystopia. Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four is a satirical work which moves against Wells' utopian toward the reflection of a distorted technological society. Undoubtedly, satire is the best literary mode for dystopic depiction of the world specifically the one portrayed in Nineteen Eighty-Four. Winston Smith, the central character of this novel, is lower from his society in terms of intelligence and power of action. Therefore, he is put under rigid controls and brainwashing. And at last, he awfully rejects his love in favor the principles of the Party. Thus, in this study, we try to investigate Winston's romantic life in a satiric manner with respect to Northrop Frye's theme of romance which includes the three phase of agon, pathos and anagnorisis. 


2020 ◽  
pp. 55-65
Author(s):  
Zoia Shevchenko

The article examines the relationship between the development of feminist ideas in the positioning of the subject in feminist theory (Simone de Beauvoir) and postfeminism (Judith Butler) in a dynamic relationship with social practices of modern society, their impact on public attitudes and on observance of equality between its representatives according to the different identities they could take: not only gender, but also racial, age, economic, political, etc. Philosophy of postmodernism is the theoretical basis of this research. This means the non-logocentric, non-fallocentric and non-textocentric research intentions. Fallocentric world is the world designed from a men perspective. Feminist theorists — such as Simone de Beauvoir — try to argue that fallocentric world is just a worldview construction, but not the world as it is in real. So feminist theorists construct their own feminist world — designed from femine perspective. However postmodern methodology denies any absolute centre and centrism. So, postfeminism rejects feminist project of just female history, just female culture, just female world. The world is the one, and it has both dimensions — male and female. Therefore feminism matters to the men too, not only the women. Logocentric methods should be supplemented with methods focused on emotional dimension of human life. Textocentric methods should be supplemented with methods focused on images and their presentations. Non-centric methodology is proper and adequate approach to the rhizome structure of the postfeminist field of inquiry. There are practical and theoretical planes that characterize the current situation of feminism: from declarative denial of classic feminism principles in real life to the further development of emancipatory ideas in academic studies. It is emphasized that existing discrimination on the basis of gender or other grounds is often supported not only by members of dominant groups, but also by people who are the object of oppression or violence. The defining role of the media in the formation of a policy of tolerance / intolerance to gender identities is noted. The characteristics of the representation of male and female visual images inherent in both patriarchal culture and the world of modern media are highlighted.


2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 640-652
Author(s):  
Filip Kovacevic

In this article, the author examines the relationship between power, time, and human reality. Using a novel by the Bosnian writer Meša Selimović as a case study, the author tests two metaphysical claims: power submits to power only, and the passage of time empties the significance of each and every human activity. The author finds that Selimović’s novel confirms both. The conclusion is profoundly pessimistic. The lives of human beings are doubly unhappy: they are spent in protracted struggles for resources and recognition that yield power, and also even the accomplishments of the victorious in these struggles will be erased by the passage of time. However, the understanding of the second claim might retroactively ameliorate the conditions of human life. Yet as evidenced by Selimović’s novel, in the world dominated by power, this does not happen. The case of Šehaga Sočo shows that even the one whose personal experience convinced him of the meaninglessness of it all is unable to break out of the cycle of rivalry and revenge. At his deathbed, he orders the death of his rivals, though he knows that to him dying, it makes no difference whether they live or die. Why not opt for forgiveness? Because, as Selimović emphasizes, power’s insistence on self-perpetuation is illogical, and it is logic that tells us not to engage in meaningless tasks. In other words, human reason is powerless to provide us with a more tolerant world.


2003 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-125
Author(s):  
Anja Stokholm

Om forholdet mellem skabelse og syndefald hos Grundtvig og Luther[Grundtvig and Luther: on the Relationship Between Creation and Fall]By Anja StokholmTheologically speaking, two circumstances determine human life: on the one side, Creation and the creativity of God, on the other the Fall of Man and human sinfulness. Because God’s good creation is continuous, a positive understanding of the status and existence of natural Man is possible; but because Man is fallen and sin destroys creation, a negative perception of human life must also be acknowledged. Useful comparison may be made between the ideas of Grundtvig and Luther on this ambiguous relationship. One may ask of each: was the image of God in Man destroyed at the Fall or does the likeness of God remain a reality even in the fallen human being? Is it possible for natural Man to understand the Gospel and the Christian life? Can the understanding of the Gospels only have a negative character because it is reached from out of consciousness of sin; or can this understanding have a positive character because, sin notwithstanding, momentary experiencing of the truth of the Gospels may be granted? Are the views of Grundtvig and Luther too divergent to be reconciled?Regin Prenter maintained that their two positions closely corresponded, arguing that Grundtvig consistently developed Luther’s reformatory principles rejecting the possibility of human beings gaining justice or salvation by their own merit, and thereby also accepted that only in consciousness of the fallen condition of the world, the subverted nature of humanity, and sin, could the Gospel’s promises be received. Prenter’s harmonisation of Grundtvig and Luther, however, gives insufficient weight to the differences. Luther contends that the image of God in Man is lost, that Man is wholly sinful and unjustified; that just as inward spirit and outward flesh are discrete and cannot mix so are the justified and the unjustified states; and it follows that the unjustified human being is to be perceived a flesh alone. In so far as continuous creation, and manifestations of the positive such as the human capacity to recognise and comply with the demands of the law, are to be found in the world, these arise not from the inner resources of human beings but from the unmerited gift of God.Grundtvig too emphasises the seriousness and destructive nature of sin; but he insists that a remnant of the image of God persists in humanity - for instance in Man’s capacity to live in faith, hope and love, and to nurture the Word (that is, speech); and that its manifestation is a token of God’s continuing, and good, creation. Crucially important is Grundtvig’s conception that the image of God is located in the human heart, for this implies that goodness and the positive phenomena of creation express human life and nature in their true and proper form, and thus Grundtvig is able to identify natural human life, governed by the heart, as a positive context within which the word of the Gospel is indeed comprehensible. In differentiation, then, from Luther, Grundtvig maintains that natural Man also has a spirit and can be the agent of love and of goodness.Is this position incompatible with Luther’s doctrine on justification? Does the notion of goodness imply that Man can and must contribute to his own salvation? Grundtvig is careful to maintain that positive qualities such as love and goodness are a creation of God in Man, not an autonomous human achievement; and that the grace of God’s continuing creation in Man does not render salvation unnecessary. Man still needs the redeeming creation of Christ.Thus there are considerable differences between Grundtvig and Luther; but Grundtvig’s ideas are to be seen as a renewal and an independent continuation of Luther’s principal doctrine: that God alone can accomplish salvation. Yet acknowledgement and awareness of the differences, which arise in part through the different times and circumstances in which these independent thinkers worked, is conducive to a productive dialogue between the two.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document