4 ms·
Yes philosophical admiration of Wittgenstein indicates a failure to take him seriously. If he was right, people should stop philosophising. But they don't. Wit
by yarrel 8y ago
Yes philosophical admiration of Wittgenstein indicates a failure to take him seriously. If he was right, people should stop philosophising.
But they don't. Wittgenstein failing to end philosophy not once but twice in the Twentieth Century marks him out as a doubly spectacular failure on his own terms.
The problem may be that neither logic nor philology exhausts philosophy in ways simpler than philosophy itself. Wittgenstein's domineering charisma and conceptual purity make his attempts to do so dazzling in ways that the flounders of the analytic tradition don't have access to.
- brownbat 8y ago> If he was right, people should stop philosophising. Slight asterisk-- if he was right, philosophers would be employed as counselors, to help people realize that the deep problems they are wondering about are probably just problems with language, or the limits of vague, abstract terminology. > But they don't. Ha, I don't know-- which way is "philosophers per capita" actually trending?
- sramsay 8y ago> Slight asterisk-- if he was right, philosophers would be employed as counselors, to help people realize that the deep problems they are wondering about are probably just problems with language, or the limits of vague, abstract terminology. That's right. And that is exactly what Rorty came to believe.