> I find Collingwood to have more helpful insights for language and communication in general than Wittgenstein, because language as Collingwood explains it incl

> I find Collingwood to have more helpful insights for language and communication in general than Wittgenstein, because language as Collingwood explains it includes bodily gestures and, although he doesn't by any means neglect the spoken and written word (which are still important to him), he emphasizes the importance of other types of language too. I'm a big fan of Collingwood as well, but did want to clarify that Wittgenstein also discusses and included body language and gesture in his writings. For instance, he wrote quite a bit about pain and emotion and links those to his own ideas on language. At the most basic level, Wittgenstein argued that language was behavior after all. > There is a story that Buddha once, at the climax of a philosophical discussion, broke into gesture-language as an Oxford philosopher may break into Greek: he took a flower in his hand, and looked at it; one of his disciples smiled, and the master said to him, ‘You have understood me.’ There's even a anecdote about Wittgenstein that is similar and was, at least according to the anecdote, very influential towards his work in PI. Wittgenstein was talking with Italian economist Piero Sraffa and discussing some of his work on language. Wittgenstein wanted to ground the entirety of language in a question of logical form. Like in TLP, at this time he was still a disciple of the picture-idea of language where "a proposition is a picture of reality". Sraffa made a gesture, that a lot of Italians will know as meaning something like disgust or contempt, of brushing the underneath of his chin with an outward sweep of the finger-tips of one hand. And he asked: “What is the logical form of that?” This form of body language was a revelation to Wittgenstein who quickly thereafter left his picture theory of language.