Wittgenstein and phenomenology

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ludwig Wittgenstein
  3. » Wittgenstein and phenomenology

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Deckard
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 04:13 pm
Does Tractatus Wittgenstein pass over the idea of a noumenal world in silence? Does later Wittgenstein attempt to reconnect with the noumenal world? Do these questions make sense?
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 04:17 pm
@Deckard,
Deckard;129439 wrote:
Does Tractatus Wittgenstein pass over the idea of a noumenal world in silence? Does later Wittgenstein attempt to reconnect with the noumenal world? Do these questions make sense?


My non-expert opinion.
1. I think so.
2. I don't think so.
3. Yes

"In order to find the real artichoke, we divested it of its leaves."
 
Insty
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 04:53 pm
@Deckard,
Deckard;129439 wrote:
Does Tractatus Wittgenstein pass over the idea of a noumenal world in silence? Does later Wittgenstein attempt to reconnect with the noumenal world? Do these questions make sense?

I think I understand what you mean by these questions, but I don't think the later Wittgenstein would.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 04:55 pm
@Deckard,
Deckard;129439 wrote:
Does Tractatus Wittgenstein pass over the idea of a noumenal world in silence? Does later Wittgenstein attempt to reconnect with the noumenal world? Do these questions make sense?


Tractatus Wittgenstein thinks that the idea of the noumenal word is unsinn.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 05:09 pm
@Insty,
Insty;129456 wrote:
I think I understand what you mean by these questions, but I don't think the later Wittgenstein would.


I think I know what you mean, but I also think that Wittgenstein would know what Deckard meant.
 
Insty
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 05:16 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;129469 wrote:
I think I know what you mean, but I also think that Wittgenstein would know what Deckard meant.


I can imagine that Wittgenstein would have understood, but only in a Pickwickian sense.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 08:10 pm
@Insty,
Insty;129474 wrote:
I can imagine that Wittgenstein would have understood, but only in a Pickwickian sense.




PRONUNCIATION:
(pik-WIK-ee-uhn) http://wordsmith.org/words/images/sound-icon.png
MEANING:
adjective:
1. Marked by generosity, naivete, or innocence.
2. Not intended to be taken in a literal sense.

ETYMOLOGY:
After Samuel Pickwick, a character in the novel Pickwick Papers (serialized 1836-1837) by Charles Dickens. Mr Pickwick is known for his simplicity and kindness. In the novel Mr. Pickwick and Mr. Blotton call each other names and it appears later that they were using the offensive words only in a Pickwickian sense and had the highest regard for each other.
 
Insty
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 10:30 pm
@Deckard,
I meant, of course, the latter of the two definitions Smile
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:08 pm
@Insty,
Insty;129515 wrote:
I meant, of course, the latter of the two definitions Smile


I suppose the reason why I thought W would understand was the fascination he had with Schopenhauer, who was quite the Kantian. I can imagine W grinning a bit, indeed.

If I remember correctly, he loved detective novels and violent American movies. A person whose name I can't remember said he could do amazing impressions, that he could have been a performer, a comedian. His philosophy seems austere by contrast. It makes me wonder.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:15 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;129523 wrote:
I suppose the reason why I thought W would understand was the fascination he had with Schopenhauer, who was quite the Kantian. I can imagine W grinning a bit, indeed.

If I remember correctly, he loved detective novels and violent American movies. A person whose name I can't remember said he could do amazing impressions, that he could have been a performer, a comedian. His philosophy seems austere by contrast. It makes me wonder.


He could whistle whole Beethoven symphonies almost note for note. He was a proficient architect, and built a beautiful house for his very wealthy family. He was the brother of Paul Wittgenstein, the pianist, for whom Ravel wrote his Concerto for the Left Hand, because Paul lost his hand during combat in the first World War. Johannes Brahms was a frequent visitor to the home of his family.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:27 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;129529 wrote:
He could whistle whole Beethoven symphonies almost note for note. He was a proficient architect, and built a beautiful house for his very wealthy family. He was the brother of Paul Wittgenstein, the pianist, for whom Ravel wrote his Concerto for the Left Hand, because Paul lost his hand during combat in the first World War. Johannes Brahms was a frequent visitor to the home of his family.


Yes, I've recently looked at a few biographies. His life was stranger than most fiction.
 
Insty
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:32 pm
@Deckard,
Yes, my point was that W would have understood talk about the "noumenal world," but only as a symptom that language had gone on a holiday, not as a reference to some metaphysical realm beyond the phenomenal world.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:42 pm
@Insty,
Insty;129539 wrote:
Yes, my point was that W would have understood talk about the "noumenal world," but only as a symptom that language had gone on a holiday, not as a reference to some metaphysical realm beyond the phenomenal world.


Oh, then in that sense I can understand any nonsense. I can understand it is nonsense. But that is not understanding nonsense.
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:52 pm
@Insty,
Insty;129539 wrote:
Yes, my point was that W would have understood talk about the "noumenal world," but only as a symptom that language had gone on a holiday, not as a reference to some metaphysical realm beyond the phenomenal world.


What do you make of those passages in the Tractatus about the self being the limit of the world? Of course that's his earlier stuff, but these are some of my favorite passages.

Also, I would like your opinion on this quote from Rorty on Wittgenstein.

"He thereby became reconciled to the notion that there was nothing ineffable, and that philosophy, like language, was just a set of indefinitely expansible social practices, not a bounded whole whose periphery might be shown."

And this one, a little down the page:

"This position entails, as Nagel puts its, that any thoughts we can form of a mind-independent reality must remain within the boundaries set by our human form of life."

Kant's noumena was a sort of limiting concept. An X for the unknown, I think, and nothing more.
 
Insty
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:55 pm
@Deckard,
For W, a question about the noumenal world can be understood in the same way that a question like, "What do these sounds smell like?" can be understood. The question doesn't make sense; but it can be "understood" as a sign that the questioner is confused.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 17 Feb, 2010 11:57 pm
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;129548 wrote:
What do you make of those passages in the Tractatus about the self being the limit of the world? Of course that's his earlier stuff, but these are some of my favorite passages.

Also, I would like your opinion on this quote from Rorty on Wittgenstein.

"He thereby became reconciled to the notion that there was nothing ineffable, and that philosophy, like language, was just a set of indefinitely expansible social practices, not a bounded whole whose periphery might be shown."

And this one, a little down the page:

"This position entails, as Nagel puts its, that any thoughts we can form of a mind-independent reality must remain within the boundaries set by our human form of life."

Kant's noumena was a sort of limiting concept. An X for the unknown, I think, and nothing more.


Kant includes God and Free Will in the Noumenon. That's being unknown?
 
Insty
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 12:06 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;129548 wrote:
What do you make of those passages in the Tractatus about the self being the limit of the world? Of course that's his earlier stuff, but these are some of my favorite passages.

Also, I would like your opinion on this quote from Rorty on Wittgenstein.

"He thereby became reconciled to the notion that there was nothing ineffable, and that philosophy, like language, was just a set of indefinitely expansible social practices, not a bounded whole whose periphery might be shown."

And this one, a little down the page:

"This position entails, as Nagel puts its, that any thoughts we can form of a mind-independent reality must remain within the boundaries set by our human form of life."

Kant's noumena was a sort of limiting concept. An X for the unknown, I think, and nothing more.


I am inclined to agree with Rorty's reading -- at least, I agree with the first of the passages you quoted.

In many ways, I find the view offered in the Tractatus to be more attractive than the one in the Investigations. Unfortunately, I think the view of the Investigations is the correct one. (Unless one believes, as some have argued, that W actually had the same view of language in the Tractatus as he had in the Investigations, and that the Tractatus was simply an attempt to present his view in a different way).
 
Reconstructo
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 12:21 am
@Insty,
Insty;129559 wrote:
I am inclined to agree with Rorty's reading -- at least, I agree with the first of the passages you quoted.

In many ways, I find the view offered in the Tractatus to be more attractive than the one in the Investigations. Unfortunately, I think the view of the Investigations is the correct one. (Unless one believes, as some have argued, that W actually had the same view of language in the Tractatus as he had in the Investigations, and that the Tractatus was simply an attempt to present his view in a different way).


Would you agree that the Investigates have little to say about the history of philosophy? Extremely piece-meal work. The Tractatus is more exciting by far, I think. And yet I feel that the picture theory of language is quite limited. Can the later statements in the Tractatus concerning the self and silence be accounted for by the picture theory of meaning? In your opinion?

Have you read Wittgenstein's Vienna? That book implies that Fritz Mauthner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia influenced Wittgenstein. Indeed, that Vienna was generally concerned with Wittgensteinian issues.
Also that ethics were Wittgenstein's motivating concern.
 
MMP2506
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 12:27 am
@Deckard,
Deckard;129439 wrote:
Does Tractatus Wittgenstein pass over the idea of a noumenal world in silence? Does later Wittgenstein attempt to reconnect with the noumenal world? Do these questions make sense?


That is a very interesting connection. It does seem as Tractatus flies right by any noumenal existence and almost falls into a sort of linguistic positivism.

Philosophical investigations on the other hand, seems to not only identify with a noumenal world, but allows for the subject to assume complete control over it.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Thu 18 Feb, 2010 12:32 am
@Reconstructo,
Reconstructo;129567 wrote:
Would you agree that the Investigates have little to say about the history of philosophy? Extremely piece-meal work. The Tractatus is more exciting by far, I think. And yet I feel that the picture theory of language is quite limited. Can the later statements in the Tractatus concerning the self and silence be accounted for by the picture theory of meaning? In your opinion?

Have you read Wittgenstein's Vienna? That book implies that Fritz Mauthner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia influenced Wittgenstein. Indeed, that Vienna was generally concerned with Wittgensteinian issues.
Also that ethics were Wittgenstein's motivating concern.


Why should the Investigations have anything to say about the history of philosophy (although Wittgenstein does, on occasion talk about how his view contrast with, for instance, those of Augustine, and he also alludes to other philosophers)? On the other hand, the Tractatus has very little contact with the history of philosophy. Indeed, it is an attempt to repudiate previous philosophy.

It is interesting that Wittgenstein tells us in the foreword to the Investigations that he hopes that the book will help others think for themselves about these problems, although he hardly expects it will. He knew how much most people liked to be led by, and confine themselves to interpretations of philosophers they admired, so that they seldom, if ever, thought about the problems of philosophy for themselves.
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Ludwig Wittgenstein
  3. » Wittgenstein and phenomenology
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.13 seconds on 12/11/2024 at 04:25:41