You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Was the Investigations anti theoretical or was there a theory of truth embedded in it?

Shawn November 05, 2019 at 11:25 3700 views 10 comments
It is a common misconception to think that Wittgenstein was anti-theoretical in his Philosophical Investigations. There's simply too much evidence that doesn't support that conclusion.

At first I thought Ramsey reduced the whole conception of a correspondence theory of truth combined with deflationary tendencies, with some serious pragmaticist undertones, and for all I know that seemed like the right conclusion.

But, the genius that Wittgenstein was took a much more macroscopic view on how language works, and here are my thoughts...

The beetle in the box, the incomprehensible speech of a talking lion, family resemblemces, language games, the rule-following paradox, and the private language argument all point to something entirely unseen at the time, Something that linguistic cognitivists like Chomsky talk about to this day. In that, there is an embedded syntax and grammar that we all possess that allow us to mimic, gesture, point towards, name, command, and question our own deeply held beliefs.

Is this even considered as something that modern scholars think about, because I'd love to read a paper on this, and all of it feels right in my mind?

Thoughts?

Comments (10)

Streetlight November 05, 2019 at 11:45 #348924
Quoting Wallows
In that, there is an embedded syntax and grammar that we all possess


What you think Wittgenstein - Investigations Wittgenstein - says this?
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 11:49 #348925
Quoting StreetlightX
What you think Wittgenstein says this?


User image
Streetlight November 05, 2019 at 12:01 #348929
Reply to Wallows A comic? Seriously? Does your thread have a point? You listed a bunch of Wittgenstein buzzwords, briefly invoked Chomsky - a thinker who could not be more antithetical to late Wittgenstein if he tried to be - and then asked 'is this something that modern scholars think about?' - what is 'this'?
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 12:03 #348930
Quoting StreetlightX
A comic? Seriously? Does your thread have a point? You listed a bunch of Wittgenstein buzzwords, briefly invoked Chomsky - a thinker who could not be more antithetical to late Wittgenstein if he tried his darnedest - and then asked 'is this something that modern scholars think about?' - what is 'this'?


Hold your preconceptions in pause.

Just what does a talking yet incomprehensible lion exactly mean to you?
Streetlight November 05, 2019 at 12:04 #348931
Reply to Wallows No. This is your thread. What is it about?
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 12:04 #348932
Quoting StreetlightX
What is it about?


A different grammar or syntax being used by it?
Streetlight November 05, 2019 at 12:05 #348934
Ugh.
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 12:07 #348936
Quoting StreetlightX
Ugh.


What did you expect me to say?
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 12:09 #348937
Fine, try this.

Forms of life, taken within the context of the grammar and syntax used by people, point to... cognitivism.

How else do you state this?
Shawn November 05, 2019 at 17:27 #349113
https://books.google.it/books?id=jlVpAgAAQBAJ&pg=PR3#v=onepage&q&f=false