>Regarding Wittgenstein: as a graduate student in the
>70s every upper division philosophy course that I
>took studied the same book "Philosophical Investigations."
>We read it from the first page and never made it to
>the end. All of us were attempting to understand him
>with poor results. Perhaps there is a school somewhere
>which reads him with more success. But then why
>does another book come out every few years with a
>new interpretation of his thesis.
It depends on what you expect to find in the Investigations - if you're
looking for a philosophical textbook a la Kant, then you have every
right to be dissapointed - but this is simply not what W. intends it to
be. And all 'new interpretations of his thesis' suffer from the same
gross misunderstanding: "If one tried to advance theses in philosophy,
it would never be possible to debate them, because everyone would agree
to them" (P.I #128).
Of course you might want to complain that this is the tripe that you're
sick of. Or you might actually want to try to understand why he wrote
it.
And I'd be willing to suggest similar things along the lines of
Derrida's writings too. In case you are interested in learning about
this rather than just 'commenting', you might like to start with Henry
Staten's excellent book, "Wittgenstein and Derrida" 1984, Nebraska
Press.
Jon
"In philosophy, we do not draw conclusions"
Wittgenstein PI 599
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>70s every upper division philosophy course that I
>took studied the same book "Philosophical Investigations."
>We read it from the first page and never made it to
>the end. All of us were attempting to understand him
>with poor results. Perhaps there is a school somewhere
>which reads him with more success. But then why
>does another book come out every few years with a
>new interpretation of his thesis.
It depends on what you expect to find in the Investigations - if you're
looking for a philosophical textbook a la Kant, then you have every
right to be dissapointed - but this is simply not what W. intends it to
be. And all 'new interpretations of his thesis' suffer from the same
gross misunderstanding: "If one tried to advance theses in philosophy,
it would never be possible to debate them, because everyone would agree
to them" (P.I #128).
Of course you might want to complain that this is the tripe that you're
sick of. Or you might actually want to try to understand why he wrote
it.
And I'd be willing to suggest similar things along the lines of
Derrida's writings too. In case you are interested in learning about
this rather than just 'commenting', you might like to start with Henry
Staten's excellent book, "Wittgenstein and Derrida" 1984, Nebraska
Press.
Jon
"In philosophy, we do not draw conclusions"
Wittgenstein PI 599
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com