Investigations philosophiques Wikipdia Philosophical Investigations WittgensteinImmediately upon its posthumous publication in , LudwigWittgenstein s Philosophical Investigations was hailed as amasterpiece, and the ensuing years have confirmed this initialassessment Today it is widely acknowledged to be the single mostimportant philosophical work of the twentieth century Philosophical Investigations Philosophical Investigations is an open access, on line, scholarly, collaborative knowledge work It combines images, cartoons, poetry, and of course text to examine philosophy in the widest possible sense Pi has a Weekly Cycle allowing time for reflective, ideally philosophical comments on new posts These are added every Monday, with occasional special posts above all for breaking news Philosophical Investigations Wiley Online Library The most recent Special Issue Aprilof Philosophical Investigations is devoted to the proceedings of the th British Wittgenstein Society conference Read the Issue here The previous Special Issue Aprilwas devoted to the philosophy of Wittgenstein, and related to the concept and practice of verbal persuasion Philosophical Investigations Philosophical Investigations is a monthly podcast all about philosophy with no prior knowledge required In this episode, we look at Pato s definition of knowledge, Gettier cases, and learn about conceptual analysis For transcripts, sources and notes for all episodes, visit medium philosophical investigations Share Download LudwigWittgenstein philosophical investigations by ludwig wittgenstein translated by g e m anscombe basil b l a c k w e l lPDF Philosophical Investigations Download Full Published in , Wittgenstein s Philosophical Investigations had a deeply unsettling effect upon our most basic philosophical ideas concerning thought, sensation and language Its claim that philosophical questions of meaning necessitate a close analysis of the way we use language continues to influence Anglo American philosophy today Philosophical Investigations by Ludwig Wittgenstein Shelves prose style, highly recommended favorites, language logic and linguistics, footnotes to plato, germanophilia If you read first Wittgenstein s Tractatus, and then follow it with his Philosophical Investigations, you will treat yourself to perhaps the most fascinating intellectual development in the history of philosophy o my crap, what a tortured soul Ludwig Wittgenstein was this guy stared into the impenetrable pitch blackness that was the tangled midnight jungle of his own inner existence, sharpened his machete, and plunged in, hacking and flailing and lunging wildly he wrestles chiefly with the concepts of language, meaning, understanding, and states of consciousness part I consists of 693 short numbered sections about 4 to a page this was sent to the publisher but pulled back at the last second five y o my crap, what a tortured soul Ludwig Wittgenstein was this guy stared into the impenetrable pitch blackness that was the tangled midnight jungle of his own inner existence, sharpened his machete, and plunged in, hacking and flailing and lunging wildly he wrestles chiefly with the concepts of language, meaning, understanding, and states of consciousness part I consists of 693 short numbered sections about 4 to a page this was sent to the publisher but pulled back at the last second five years before LW died after he died, his further writings were scraped together and comprise part II, loosely divided into 13 short sections plus 1 long one there is no steady development, but sometimes long chains of remarks on one topic, sometimes sudden changes of topic he often puts statements or questions in quotation marks, as though thrown at him by someone playing devil s advocate it is all extremely personal, written very much in the first person.the first half of this book is soooooo much better than the second half i looked in my notebook and found that i jotted 111 notes from the first 120 pages, and only 34 from the last 110 pages by the end, i was quite happy for it to be over so maybe it doesn t deserve 5 stars but some of it is quite amazing he concludes the introduction It is not impossible that it should fall to the lot of this work, in its poverty and in the darkness of this time, to bring light into one brain or another but of course, it is not likely I should not like my writing to spare other people the trouble of thinking But, if possible, to stimulate someone to thoughts of his own.I should have liked to produce a good book This has not come about, but the time is past in which I could improve it just for that, he gets 5 stars from me This is the first work by Wittgenstein I ve ever read I ve been terrified of him for years, truth be told I ve read a biography by W.W Bartley III wouldn t you love to be the third I would stick the three I s on the end of my name too, if I was, but unfortunately I m only Trevor the Second The main memory I have of that book is of Wittgenstein waiting to be captured in WWI and him humming the second movement of Beethoven s Seventh That has always been one of my all time favourite piec This is the first work by Wittgenstein I ve ever read I ve been terrified of him for years, truth be told I ve read a biography by W.W Bartley III wouldn t you love to be the third I would stick the three I s on the end of my name too, if I was, but unfortunately I m only Trevor the Second The main memory I have of that book is of Wittgenstein waiting to be captured in WWI and him humming the second movement of Beethoven s Seventh That has always been one of my all time favourite pieces of music and if I was ever in a machine gun nest about to be captured or potentially killed by the enemy, I could think of no better piece of music to be humming The fear has come from the fact Wittgenstein is known as being off the scale brilliant And so I just assumed he would also be too hard to read, with him picking out distinctions I wouldn t be able to see even after he had held them to the light and turned them about.This book is, in fact, quite beautifully written The ideas are complex at times, but he does all he can to make them clear.That said, I also know I ve only skimmed the surface of this one.This is a book about meaning it is a book about how language means and therefore the extent to which language allows communication between people I m going to jump to my understanding of Wittgenstein s answer although, answer isn t the right word and that is that language is always socially situated and so you need to understand the situation to make sense of the language.A philosophical project prior to this was the idea of trying to create a language that could be unambiguous and purely logical one that could start from a series of axioms and then go on to recreate the world with each of its statements being verifiably true This is the sort of idea mentioned in 1984 that for as long as I can know 2 2 4 then, and so on But then, think of the word March You can say, The best time to come to Melbourne is March or you can say, The second movement of the Seventh is a slow march Clearly, the fact march is a homophone is hardly surprising to anyone but Wittgenstein asks if even that is really true Can you say the month in the same way as you say the verb If you are meaning the month, can you say it as the verb The point being that you might not be able to hear any difference between the two uses of the word at all, and yet still feel in your bones that it isn t possible to say exactly the same sound while meaning the other This almost links to something he says comparing language to music an idea I think about a lot He says, Understanding a sentence is muchakin to understanding a theme in music than one might think I think one could spend a lifetime considering that idea and the practical expression of that thought is called poetry, but it is also true of all language, poetry just rubs your nose in it.He makes a similar point elsewhere when he says, one might tell someone if you want to pronounce the salutation Hail expressively, you had better not think of hailstones as you say it All of which makes me think of the difference between effect and affect , which I think brings us close to the idea of the socially situated nature of language I think that, for me anyway, these two words are homophones in English unless I m using affect in the sense of affecting a pose, although the dictionary seems to imply that affect is pronounced in the same way regardless of the meaning Still, as the dictionary also says affect and effect are frequently confused Although, also clearly, they are never confused when we hear them only when we write them No one says, did you hear that he said effect but he obviously meant affect so, why not Or rather, andto the point, why do we distinguish in spelling what we don t seem to distinguish in spoken language A large part of me believes that this distinction in spelling is about stressing social superiority that is, it is oneof the endless rules designed to make clear that one has learnt the rules , that one can display their learning and then, presumably, use this display to imply their higher intelligence These are things that make no difference to meaning, but only to taste and as displays of social position When people get obsessed with the spellings of there , their and they re this is purely about showing off one s academic capital and little else The fact these three words are homophones proves no one ever confuses their meaning when they are spoken No one ever says oh, you said you want their lunch I thought you meant they re lunch The smugness you might feel when you see these mistakes in written form has nothing to do with meaning but rather everything to do with social taste and distinction.I think this is the idea Wittgenstein is alluding to when he says language is really language games not in the least that they are trivial, quite the opposite, the only games we can play in this whole meaning business are language games language derives the most important part of its meaning from the game we are playing at the time, from how it is socially situated When I studied philosophy there would always come a time when someone in the class would say, and in all seriousness, you know, what I see as red might not be anything at all like what you see as red we just don t know I wouldn t be surprised to find out that my face has a special twitch that it performs when I hear someone say this Wittgenstein spends a lot of time talking about pain in this book how it makes no sense for someone to wonder if they, themselves, are in pain, for instance But since pain is like the red idea above, that is, no one else can really feel my pain and so no one can even know if I m not faking it , how can we have ended up having a word for it Surely the word pain has to refer to something and that something has to be a kind of common knowledge , but since I can only feel my pain, how can I know it is common That is, it is as if I have something in a box that you are forbidden to see and you have something in your box that I am forbidden to see how can we know if they are the same thing Wittgenstein does not say it in this way, but I think ultimately these are practical questions, rather than ones that can be solved by logic How do you know that what you see as red, I don t see as green Well, the game that we call, driving our cars, pretty well answers that question There is muchto this book than I can cover and muchthan I ve even understood so much of it reminded me of Saussure, but also Chomsky he even talks of deep and surface grammar But this is a book of questions rather than a book of answers I couldn t possibly do Philosophical Investigations justice in a review Even though I ve read it several times, I don t understandthan a fraction of it The unworthy thought does sometimes cross my mind that its author didn t understand it either, but you understand I m just jealous because I m not a Great Philosopher I would so like to be one.Assuming you aren t an aspiring Great Philosopher, my advice is not to take this book too seriously it is very frustrating Skim it quickly, th I couldn t possibly do Philosophical Investigations justice in a review Even though I ve read it several times, I don t understandthan a fraction of it The unworthy thought does sometimes cross my mind that its author didn t understand it either, but you understand I m just jealous because I m not a Great Philosopher I would so like to be one.Assuming you aren t an aspiring Great Philosopher, my advice is not to take this book too seriously it is very frustrating Skim it quickly, then check out Philosophical Tribulations by Flash qFiasco and the Uncyclopedia article on Wittgenstein, which may help you appreciate the funny side of this unfinished masterpiece.I had to try it myself See my review of Biggles of the Camel Squadron.I particularly recommend the following passage, from the end of Dr qFiasco s article 38 The wind cries Mary, but it can t call Bob Why 39 Come down off the peaks of obscure rant ism with your rucksack of little grammatical fictions and just whack balls around on the croquet pitch of mundanity Sometimes a simile makes me puke.40 If I say raise your arm, you know perfectly well what to do and you raise your arm Now suppose I say, Want to raise your arm Only don t really raise it, just want to Are you quite sure you know what to do in this case Suppose I say, Want to raise your arm tomorrow Now suppose I said that last week, and say it again next week is this the same want as before, or a different one Of course all those queer wants go on in me, and now I want to say Oh, to hell with what you always want to say Get on with it 41 My philosophy can only be understood as bad poetry.42 Philosophy is the disease for which it is supposed to be the cure, but isn t.We have met the enemy and they are us The Jewishness of this remark This book was assembled posthumously, Wittgenstein having published very little in his lifetime Although usually coupled with the Tractatus, it is actuallyrepresentative of his thought and method.The virtue of Wittgenstein may be that with him there is no hint of metaphysical conceit or self deception, but rather a consistent treatment of reality as, in fact, various language games language being understood broadly to include everything from the semiotic to the symbolic, the denotati This book was assembled posthumously, Wittgenstein having published very little in his lifetime Although usually coupled with the Tractatus, it is actuallyrepresentative of his thought and method.The virtue of Wittgenstein may be that with him there is no hint of metaphysical conceit or self deception, but rather a consistent treatment of reality as, in fact, various language games language being understood broadly to include everything from the semiotic to the symbolic, the denotative to the connotative, and games being understood to be intersubjective practices Interestingly, however, behind this reserve runs a strong mystical sense comparable to Kant s attraction aversion to the Ideas of Reason While he was, on the one hand, a thoroughgoing critic of sloppy thinking and expression he was also, on the other, prone to the religio aesthetic flights of the late Heidegger The study of his biography and jottings presents the image of a man at once piercingly clear and personally enigmatic, at once a dispeller of illusions and a victim of multiple neuroses While apparently coming across to his redoubtable colleagues, including Bertrand Russell, as a genius, his actual writings are all rather easy going, suggesting, to me at least, that we re all or none of us geniuses This book is too complex to summarize, but here is a nutshell If you want to know the meaning of a word, consider how the word is used Words are used in a variety of language games, interactions among people, which display family resemblances That is, there is no single model which shows the essence of how words are used, but rather there are many overlapping and differing language games, each of which is a different model.Enough summarizing Now to what I am interested in, what I called, This book is too complex to summarize, but here is a nutshell If you want to know the meaning of a word, consider how the word is used Words are used in a variety of language games, interactions among people, which display family resemblances That is, there is no single model which shows the essence of how words are used, but rather there are many overlapping and differing language games, each of which is a different model.Enough summarizing Now to what I am interested in, what I called, once before, Wittgenstein s behaviorism, which I didn t like After reading the Philosophical Investigations, I have come to the conclusion that Wittgenstein is not nearly as behavioristic as I had thought In fact, he is the most introspective behaviorist that I could imagine, but he still ends up beingof a behaviorist than I like.What do I mean by behaviorism Wittgenstein is a skeptic with regard to meaning, in the sense that he does not think that meaning is something we can look inside of ourselves introspect to discover As I summarized above, Wittgenstein believes that meaning is revealed by the use of a word in social interactions, in other words through language games, the behavior of the people using the word.Consider words for what we usually think of as mental phenomena thinking, believing, remembering, knowing, and the like How can you tell if someone knows that Paris is in France If you ask him, he gives you the right answer If he looks inside of his mind, must there be the knowledge that Paris is in France Not necessarily, He might not even be thinking of that, and even if he were subvocalizing Paris is in France, is there a mental quality that distinguishes that as knowing Thus Wittgenstein gives a formidable argument that knowing consists not in any mental phenomenon, but in the behavior of giving the right answer In making this argument, Wittgenstein has not avoided introspection as a technique On the contrary he has used it extensively Even when he asks us to imagine a certain language game, we are imagining a behavior, but we are using introspection to do it Wittgenstein is a master of asking the rhetorical question which reveals how we use a particular word in social interactions, but each rhetorical question requires a looking into ourselves and our experiences.Wittgenstein is not ultimately hostile to our looking into ourselves, in fact I think he would regard it as a fruitful part of life But his basic point is that only when our introspected observations can be validated by being part of our interactions with other people our language games , only then can the words have consistent and usable meanings.My quibble with this is that introspection sometimes yieldsresults than Wittgenstein is prepared to recognize As just one example, Wittgenstein asks, how do we judge time He says that we might sit for a while, and say About five minutes have passed and we may be right He says that there is no introspectable experience of time passing or of measuring time But I am not sure if that is right Paul Churchland talks about a pulsing of neuronic signals from the center of the brain to the perimeter and back again This means that our sensory processing echoes and reverberates with these pulses and gives us a sense of time passing If we attend to the experience of this, we may be able to discriminate what makes us sensitive to the passage of time, and we may be able to do this in a way which can be validated by other people If we are able to make these discriminations through introspection before the science is available to explain it, is it still meaningless That is my rhetorical question As a philosopher, Wittgenstein isn t terribly systematic rather shocking for an analytic thinker I would argue that he s an original, using analytic thought experiments , continental literary examples , pragmatic everyday life as a litmus test , and Nietzschean aphoristic style, attitude problem elements Hell, I m almost loathe to call it philosophy at all It slike a gorgeous, dense, glittering puzzle box I guarantee that when I read it again somewhere down the line, I ll get As a philosopher, Wittgenstein isn t terribly systematic rather shocking for an analytic thinker I would argue that he s an original, using analytic thought experiments , continental literary examples , pragmatic everyday life as a litmus test , and Nietzschean aphoristic style, attitude problem elements Hell, I m almost loathe to call it philosophy at all It slike a gorgeous, dense, glittering puzzle box I guarantee that when I read it again somewhere down the line, I ll get something entirely different out of it Wittgenstein seems less concerned with presenting a systematic argument than in prodding the reader s mind Exasperating, but worth it.The syntax of the Investigations has a jaggedly Asperger s feel to it Too often Wittgenstein sounds like a malfunctioning android jabbering its core protocols to itself, pacing in frantic circles, waving its arms in a vexed Philosophy is the sickness and I m the cure manner The loathsome blend of pedantry and vagueness throughout Part 1 hectoring in tone, nebulous in definition can be maddening As a communicator, Wittgenstein often ranks with Kant or Heideg Exasperating, but worth it.The syntax of the Investigations has a jaggedly Asperger s feel to it Too often Wittgenstein sounds like a malfunctioning android jabbering its core protocols to itself, pacing in frantic circles, waving its arms in a vexed Philosophy is the sickness and I m the cure manner The loathsome blend of pedantry and vagueness throughout Part 1 hectoring in tone, nebulous in definition can be maddening As a communicator, Wittgenstein often ranks with Kant or Heidegger, pitiless kraut magi of galling opacity Your cognitive muscles will feel the burn Part 2 is rather less punishing, with enticing stimulants on nearly every page, while large swaths of Part 1 are a morale stunting crawl through banks of fog What s the deal Keep in mind that PI is a posthumous medley of notes and fragments that never benefitted from a final, rigorous copyedit I ve also been told that the recent 2009 translation by Peter Hacker and Joachim Schulte is less stodgy and peeving than the classic Anscombe version An editor might be tempted to abridge Part 1 to a Best Ofshowcase for non academics, but the moments of profundity strewn throughout that portion 75% of the book probably require the groundwork of thewearying fragments to shore up Wittgenstein s vision.So what s the payoff Well, a panoptic voyage into speech and semantics that s both rousing, emancipatory, and at times, painfully obvious The latter as we ve washed ashore in a post philosophical age that takes so much of Wittgenstein for granted, but also because his expository style can read like an amnesiac head trauma patient attempting to reconstruct language use from scratch, poking and prodding at kindergarten level grammar to explore how situational semantics weaves and bends through our intricately embodied, moment to moment actualities all tempered by an uneasy nostalgia for positivist puzzles boxed in the attic, radiant antiques that gave so much faux luster to our mental lives.Wittgenstein wants us to detox, to scrape out the arterial plaque of false problems Fundamental confusions about language use, he fears, have staggered us into an ersatz world of epistemic mazes and circular obstacle courses, a bad Philip K Dick novel of cloying simulacra PI aims to unjack us from this Matrix, wrench us back down into our bodies, a homecoming to and abashed rediscovery of the everyday Though Darwin is never mentioned in PI, Wittgenstein s corrosive presence in the philosophical canon is comparable to evolutionary models preempting theological sleight of hand Post theist armchair philosophy, in Wittgenstein s eyes, is still beholden to the system erecting wankfest of priestly theorizing To reiterate a familiar story, we ve displaced ancient Platonic illusions into the matrices of rationalist projects which refuse to accept that our universe is non linguistic, and so can never be mirrored or simulated by our anthropic, earthbound syntax Our lives are short and our knowledge is crimped and narrow It s best we have the humility to concede our limits, pending some dubious, self immolating transhumanist upgrade As with Kant, wisdom often means knowing what we can t do 426 A picture is conjured up which seems to fix the sense unambiguously The actual use, compared with that suggested by the picture, seems like something muddied Here again we get the same thing as in set theory the form of expression we use seems to have been designed for a god, who knows what we cannot know he sees the whole of each of those infinite series and he sees into human consciousness For us, of course, these forms of expression are like pontificals which we may put on, but cannot do much with, since we lack the effective power that would give these vestments meaning and purpose In the actual use of expressions we make detours, we go by side roads We see the straight highway before us, but of course we cannot use it, because it is permanently closed pg 108, Blackwell 2001 To prime yourself, download the two part Partially Examined Life podcast Wittgenstein on Language Episode 55 1 53 07 56 1 53 01 roundtable discussion throughout is very good My only niggle pertains to one of the participants bungling the renowned Piero Sraffa anecdote, mistakenly attributing it to G.E Moore The fact that the remaining scholars claim never to have heard of it is equally strange It s at least as famous as the Karl Popper fireplace poker episode Wittgenstein even thanks Sraffa in his Preface Oh well PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS translated by G.E.M Anscombe A for substantive vision and historical importance, C for expository clarity.Special bonus track Was Wittgenstein Right by Paul Horwich NYU , The Stone, New York Times Opinionator blog, 3 3 13 An offline discussion with Simon Evnine prompted me to reread the first few sections of this book, which I hadn t looked at in ages They inspired the following short story Wang s First Day on the JobWang is a Chinese construction worker who s just arrived in the US He doesn t know a word of English, but he figures he ll get by The important thing is that he knows construction work His English speaking cousin takes him to a building site and manages to get him hired by Wittgenstein Constructi An offline discussion with Simon Evnine prompted me to reread the first few sections of this book, which I hadn t looked at in ages They inspired the following short story Wang s First Day on the JobWang is a Chinese construction worker who s just arrived in the US He doesn t know a word of English, but he figures he ll get by The important thing is that he knows construction work His English speaking cousin takes him to a building site and manages to get him hired by Wittgenstein Construction Inc.The foreman is laying slabs He points to Wang Slab he says Wang has no idea what he s talking about The foreman points to the slabs he s already laid, to the small pile of slabs nearby, and to the large pile of slabs in the corner of the site Slab he says again Wang understands the problem He takes a wheelbarrow and fetches some slabs.The foreman is visibly pleased Evidently Wang s cousin was telling him the truth This guy is hard working and learns fast He points to Wang again Cement he says Wang looks at him The foreman points to the bags of cement in the corner with the slabs Wang gets his wheelbarrow and comes back with a bag of cement The foreman is again pleased He s almost finished laying the slabs Wang brought the first time Slab he says again Wang understands Such a smart guy, the foreman thinks He goes off for another load Cement says the foreman Wang gets that too Slab says the foreman, when Wang s unloaded the new cement Wang s just about to go off with his wheelbarrow, when the foreman stops him He points to one slab, then another White slab red slab , he says White red Wang nods The foreman points to Wang Red slab he says Wang looks at the pile of slabs in the corner He had noticed that those on one side of the pile were red He goes and fetches a load of red slabs He comes back and unloads them Cement he asks Cement, agrees the foreman He s already decided he owes Wang s cousin a beer This unknown Chinese dude is worth his weight in gold Wang s back with the cement Slab, says the foreman Red slab asks Wang White slab, corrects the foreman Wang goes off to get the white slabs He s evenpleased than the foreman He can already see how to structure the next chapter of his dissertation on linguistic philosophy First off, this book is only 197 pages long The reason Goodreads says it s 464 pages is because this edition is dual language One side is in German the original text and the other side is in English.Compared to other philosophical readings I ve read in the past, I found this one a little easier to follow I wouldn t call this an easy read though It s quick, but after you read the book you re still think about Wittgenstein s philosophy I think I had an easier time with this compared to than First off, this book is only 197 pages long The reason Goodreads says it s 464 pages is because this edition is dual language One side is in German the original text and the other side is in English.Compared to other philosophical readings I ve read in the past, I found this one a little easier to follow I wouldn t call this an easy read though It s quick, but after you read the book you re still think about Wittgenstein s philosophy I think I had an easier time with this compared to than say Descartes because it smodern.I liked this book mainly because it was about words and langue How does a human process different words compared to other words Why some words we can picture and others we can t see in our minds The second half of this book isabout illusions taking the famous rabbit duck picture I think I like that part a little better.My only real negative part too this book is the translation This is basically the third dual translated book I ve read this year I think this one was better translated, but at times it still felt off to me There were awkward parts reading this when Wittgenstein would be talking about a certain word, but I reading him in English, not German, so I wonder if I m reading what he meant or the translator.Otherwise, Wittgenstein is a good philosopher He makes things semi easier to understand This isn t some life changing self help book or anything, but it will make youaware of how humans think, speak, write, and see I d say this is a good introduction book to read for 20th century philosophy