Imagine, for a moment, a philosopher who, having penned what he believed to be the definitive solution to all philosophical problems, promptly abandoned the field.
I’ve always been fascinated by Wittgenstein’s Picture Theory. For me, it’s not just philosophy. It’s a tool I use every time I write. Whether I’m breaking down a court case or digging into questions of international law, I find that this theory helps me turn abstract arguments into something clear, almost like holding up a picture for the reader. In my latest posts, I share how I use Wittgenstein’s logic to make legal analysis clearer and more engaging.
What Wittgenstein explained was simply the duality of human consciousness. Ostension vs explanation. They have different natures and serve different purposes. He never rejected the Tractatus, as some claim. Do not explain magenta. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Still valid now.
In noting that we do not perceive ‘reality’, itself, but, rather, only what we see-it-AS, linguistically-speaking, W. declared that Philosophical-Metaphysics was impossible.
I’ve always been fascinated by Wittgenstein’s Picture Theory. For me, it’s not just philosophy. It’s a tool I use every time I write. Whether I’m breaking down a court case or digging into questions of international law, I find that this theory helps me turn abstract arguments into something clear, almost like holding up a picture for the reader. In my latest posts, I share how I use Wittgenstein’s logic to make legal analysis clearer and more engaging.
The soul that refuses hierarchy will still obey something, usually something uglier.
What Wittgenstein explained was simply the duality of human consciousness. Ostension vs explanation. They have different natures and serve different purposes. He never rejected the Tractatus, as some claim. Do not explain magenta. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Still valid now.
Lovely essay! To imagine a language is to imagine a form of life....
“Seeing-As” — The end-of ‘Metaphysics’.
In noting that we do not perceive ‘reality’, itself, but, rather, only what we see-it-AS, linguistically-speaking, W. declared that Philosophical-Metaphysics was impossible.