[Wittrs] Re: Russell or Wittgenstein?
- From: "SWM" <SWMirsky@xxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 02:15:52 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, brendan downs <wittrs@...> wrote:
>
>
> Yes there are writings where russell calls W a fool several times, why
> reiterated so many times? There are so many similiarities in there logical
> atomism. Russell an Moore named the tractatus. W claims to refuted logical
> atomism but in PI in the preface he defends it and uses it. Why refute your
> own work??? when one can add to it. W own work in PI is not orignal and in
> his preface he admits this. He uses Augstines system of language and he turns
> ostensive definitions into ostensive training. now this implicty implied in
> the act of pointing is teaching, so ostensive definitions into ostensive
> definitions training is sononyomous with each other. like "slab" and "bring
> me a slab". W was an elemtary school teacher. in his last paragraph of PI he
> makes reference to prinicapa mathematica i.e. Russell. Russell was just as
> problemed as W with similar problems. Russell was already a genius
>
I don't understand the point being made here. Russell "was already a genius"?
Wasn't it Russell who bemoaned his own loss of intellectual powers, the ability
to do foundational work, make a real contribution to serious philosophy, and
saw, in Wittgenstein, a likely candidate to take over his life's work?
Wittgenstein's Tractatus (named by either Russell or Moore) found very few who
initially saw the sense in it. It was as if it had been written in a foreign
language to the publishers who first saw and rejected it. Indeed, it took
Russell's imprimatur to finally get it published in England.
As to the Philosophical Investigations, it's incredible to see anyone say "W
own work in PI is not orignal and in his preface he admits this". First his PI
is remarkably fresh and different, so different in fact, that it shook up the
philosophical world and left Russell benused and, eventually, a faded eminence
as philosophy in Wittgenstein's time turned in the direction he took it. Anyone
coming to the PI from the older way of doing philosophy cannot help but see how
different his approach was.
But second, the fact that he suggested, in a modest disavowal in the preface
that, if there was anything that others had introduced before him, he had no
wish to lay claim to it, only demonstrates a proper attitude toward publishing
one's work. Who, after all, wants to claim what isn't theirs? The fact that he
offered such a polite disavowal does not demonstrate he thought his work was
the work of others. In fact, as Sean I believe says elsewhere, he clearly
pointed out that he was frustrated because so much of what he had been saying
in lectures and classrooms was starting to come out under the names of other
philosophers who had been influenced by him. What is he saying when he offers
the disavowal? Only this: here is my thinking, judge for yourself.
SWM
> > Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:55:01 +0000
> > From: jrstern@...
> > To: wittrs@...
> > Subject: [Wittrs] Re: Russell or Wittgenstein?
> >
> > --- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, brendan downs <wittrs@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I would like to bring in to question the works of the "Tractatus", Was it
> > > Wittgensteins? or Russell and Moore's work? Did Russell and Moore create
> > > a genius?
> >
> > It was very different in style from anything either Russell or Moore did,
> > and I think different in its assumptions, different in its claims,
> > different in its goals.
> >
> > The relationship between Russell and Wittgenstein is always to me -
> > curious. Was Russell really that hard up for intelligent doctoral students,
> > that any human intellect would impress him so much as to take Wittgenstein
> > seriously, with all of his tempers and disagreements? One is tempted to
> > serious psychoanalysis of them both and the relationship as a third subject.
> >
> > I'm not really sure what you mean by "create a genius".
> >
> > Is this all a serious, literal proposal, that Russell and Moore made some
> > kind of a project to "create" Wittgenstein?
> >
> > Of course there are *some* influences of logicism and language in
> > Wittgenstein's work, but I gather you mean something more.
> >
> > Josh
> >
> >
> >
> > WEB VIEW: http://tinyurl.com/ku7ga4
> > TODAY: http://alturl.com/whcf
> > 3 DAYS: http://alturl.com/d9vz
> > 1 WEEK: http://alturl.com/yeza
> > GOOGLE: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
> > YAHOO: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/
> > FREELIST: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Feeling the financial pinch? Check on MSN NZ Money for a hand
> http://money.msn.co.nz
>
WEB VIEW: http://tinyurl.com/ku7ga4
TODAY: http://alturl.com/whcf
3 DAYS: http://alturl.com/d9vz
1 WEEK: http://alturl.com/yeza
GOOGLE: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
YAHOO: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/
FREELIST: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
Other related posts:
