Chat with AIExam 26: Ludwig Wittgenstein: Linguistic Analysis and Ordinary Language
Suppose that Wittgenstein is right about what philosophy can and cannot do. What does this mean for philosophy as rationalists, empiricists, and idealists have practiced it for centuries?
(30) 
Answered by Examlex AI CopilotIf Wittgenstein is right about what philosophy can and cannot do, it would have significant implications for how philosophy has been practiced by rationalists, empiricists, and idealists for centuries.
For rationalists, who believe that reason and innate ideas are the primary sources of knowledge, Wittgenstein's perspective would challenge the idea that philosophy can uncover fundamental truths about the world through pure reason alone. Instead, it would suggest that philosophy should focus on the analysis of language and the clarification of concepts, rather than the discovery of a priori truths.
Empiricists, on the other hand, emphasize the importance of sensory experience and observation in acquiring knowledge. Wittgenstein's view would call into question the traditional empiricist approach of seeking to derive fundamental truths about the world from sensory data. Instead, it would suggest that philosophy should focus on the ways in which language and concepts shape our understanding of the world, rather than attempting to derive knowledge directly from sensory experience.
For idealists, who argue that reality is fundamentally mental or spiritual in nature, Wittgenstein's perspective would challenge the idea that philosophy can uncover the ultimate nature of reality through introspection or metaphysical speculation. Instead, it would suggest that philosophy should focus on the ways in which language and thought construct our understanding of reality, rather than attempting to uncover the ultimate nature of reality itself.
In summary, if Wittgenstein is right about what philosophy can and cannot do, it would mean a significant shift in focus for philosophy as practiced by rationalists, empiricists, and idealists. Rather than seeking to uncover fundamental truths about the world through reason, sensory experience, or introspection, philosophy would be more concerned with the analysis of language and the clarification of concepts as they shape our understanding of the world.
Ostensive definitions, such as saying "spoon" while pointing to a spoon,
(29) 
VerifiedD
In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein thought he had identified the essence of language: picturing. What does he now say about this?
(34) VerifiedThere is no essence of language. "Language," like "game," is a family resemblance word. There are "countless" kinds of language use, resembling and differing endlessly, and new ones can always be added. We should not assume that, because it is all called language, there is some one thing common to all these uses. Rather, we should look and see.
What is the nature of philosophy, according to the later Wittgenstein?
(46) When language-games are being played that manifest different world-pictures
(38) What is a language-game? And why is the study of language-games useful?
(34) What does the philosopher do, according to the later Wittgenstein?
(38) In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein identified the basic unit of language as a name and said that a name stood for a simple object. What does he say now about this?
(40) What are philosophical problems like, according to the later Wittgenstein?
(30) When he ends by saying, "This is simply what I do," is Wittgenstein giving up on the quest for wisdom, or is he trying to reconceive what wisdom consists in? Explain.
(37) Philosophers such as Ryle and Austin advocate close attention to what we ordinarily say, and when, because
(39) Compare the similarities and differences in Wittgenstein's treatment of language in the Tractatus and in the Investigations.
(48) 
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)