Timeline for Does the second Wittgenstein still consider philosophical questions to be meaningless?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jan 12, 2022 at 13:04 | history | bounty ended | CommunityBot | ||
| S Jan 12, 2022 at 13:04 | history | notice removed | CommunityBot | ||
| Jan 4, 2022 at 20:18 | answer | added | Ted Wrigley | timeline score: -1 | |
| Jan 4, 2022 at 19:43 | comment | added | hellyale | you might be interested in this question and its answers : philosophy.stackexchange.com/q/24822/13958 | |
| Jan 4, 2022 at 18:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhilosophy/status/1478425996961460225 | ||
| Jan 4, 2022 at 17:44 | answer | added | Dcleve | timeline score: 1 | |
| S Jan 4, 2022 at 11:27 | history | bounty started | CommunityBot | ||
| S Jan 4, 2022 at 11:27 | history | notice added | user49505 | Draw attention | |
| Dec 22, 2021 at 10:05 | comment | added | user49505 | @DoubleKnot Thanks for the quote, it partly answers my question | |
| Dec 22, 2021 at 1:22 | comment | added | Double Knot | Wittgenstein begins Philosophical Investigations with a quote from Augustine's Confessions, which represents the view that language serves to point out objects in the world... In this picture of language we find the roots of the following idea: Every word has a meaning. This meaning is correlated with the word. It is the object for which the word stands. So clearly the later Wittgenstein recanted his earlier picture theory of language in his Tractatus, in favor of his new use theory of meaning (the "use is meaning" axiom) and the controversial rule-following paradox which Kripke supports... | |
| Dec 22, 2021 at 1:14 | comment | added | Double Knot | His earlier view is summarized in Tractatus's WP ref: the book has a therapeutic aim...The confusion that the Tractatus seeks to dispel is not a confused theory, rather the need of any such theory is confused... But his later view is milder and friendlier towards philosophy as referenced here: This conception is considered and ultimately rejected for being too general; that is, as an essentialist account of the nature of language it is simply too narrow to be able to account for the variety of things we do with language... | |
| Dec 21, 2021 at 23:43 | comment | added | Conifold | For those unversed in the jargon, "second Wittgenstein" is the late Wittgenstein of Philosophical Investigations. | |
| S Dec 21, 2021 at 20:40 | review | First questions | |||
| Dec 22, 2021 at 11:08 | |||||
| S Dec 21, 2021 at 20:40 | history | asked | user49505 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |