Sunday, June 21, 2009

Wittgenstein

The Later Wittgenstein
3.1 Transition and Critique of Tractatus
The idea that philosophy is not a doctrine, and hence should not be approached dogmatically, is one of the most important insights of the Tractatus. Yet, as early as 1931, Wittgenstein referred to his own early work as dogmatic. Wittgenstein used this term to designate any conception which allows for a gap between question and answer, such that the answer to the question could be found at a later date. The complex edifice of the Tractatus is built on the assumption that the task of logical analysis was to discover the elementary propositions, whose form was not yet known. What marks the transition from early to later Wittgenstein can be summed up as the total rejection of dogmatism, i.e., as the working out of all the consequences of this rejection. The move from the realm of logic to that of ordinary language as the center of the philosopher's attention; from an emphasis on definition and analysis to ‘family resemblance’ and ‘language-games’; and from systematic philosophical writing to an aphoristic style — all have to do with this transition towards anti-dogmatism in its extreme. It is in the Philosophical Investigations that the working out of the transitions comes to culmination. Other writings of the same period, though, manifest the same anti-dogmatic stance, as it is applied, e.g., to the philosophy of mathematics or to philosophical psychology.

3.2 Philosophical Investigations
Philosophical Investigations was published posthumously in 1953. It comprises two parts. Part I, consisting of 693 numbered paragraphs, was ready for printing in 1946, but rescinded from the publisher by Wittgenstein. Part II was added on by the editors, trustees of his Nachlass.
In the Preface to PI, Wittgenstein states that his new thoughts would be better understood by contrast with and against the background of his old thoughts, those in the Tractatus; and indeed, most of Part I of PI is essentially critical. Its new insights can be understood as primarily exposing fallacies in the traditional way of thinking about language, truth, thought, intentionality, and, perhaps mainly, philosophy. In this sense, it is conceived of as a therapeutical work, conceiving of philosophy itself as it should be — as therapy. Part II, focusing on philosophical psychology, perception etc., is not as critical. Rather, it points to new perspectives (which, undoubtedly, are not disconnected from the earlier critique) in addressing specific philosophical issues. It is, therefore, more easily read alongside Wittgenstein's other writings of the later period.

PI begins with a quote from Augustine's Confessions which "give us a particular picture of the essence of human language," based on the idea that "individual words in language name objects," and that "sentences are combinations of such names" (PI 1). This picture of language cannot be relied on as a basis for metaphysical, epistemic or linguistic speculation. Despite its plausibility, this reduction of language to representation cannot do justice to the whole of human language; and even if it is to be considered a picture of only the representative function of human language, it is, as such, a poor picture. Furthermore, this picture of language is at the base of the whole of traditional philosophy, but, for Wittgenstein, it is to be shunned in favor of a new way of looking at both language and philosophy. The Philosophical Investigations proceeds to offer the new way of looking at language, which will yield the view of philosophy as therapy.

3.3 Meaning as Use
"For a large class of cases — though not for all — in which we employ the word ‘meaning’ it can be defined thus: the meaning of a word is its use in the language" (PI 43). This basic statement is what underlies the change of perspective most typical of the later phase of Wittgenstein's thought: a change from a conception of meaning as representation to a view which looks to use as the hinge of the investigation. Traditional theories of meaning in the history of philosophy were intent on pointing to something exterior to the proposition which endows it with sense. This "something" could generally be located either in an objective space, or inside the mind as mental representation. As early as 1933 (The Blue Book) Wittgenstein took pains to challenge these dogmas, arriving at the insight that "if we had to name anything which is the life of the sign, we should have to say that it was its use" (BB 4). Ascertainment of the use (of a word, of a proposition), however, is not given to any sort of constructive theory building, as in the Tractatus. Rather, when investigating meaning, the philosopher must "look and see" the variety of uses to which the word is put. So different is this new perspective that Wittgenstein repeats: "Don't think but look!" (PI 66); and such looking is done vis a vis particular cases, not thoughtful generalizations. In giving the meaning of a word, any explanatory generalization should be replaced by a description of use. The traditional idea that a proposition houses a content and has a restricted number of Fregean forces (such as assertion, question and command), gives way to an emphasis on the diversity of uses.

3.4 Language-games and Family Resemblance
In order to address the countless multiplicity of uses, their un- fixedness, and their being "part of an activity", Wittgenstein introduces the key concept of ‘language-game’. He never explicitly defines it since, as opposed to the earlier ‘picture’, for instance, this new concept is made to do work for a more fluid, more diversified, and more activity-oriented perspective on language.

Throughout the Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein returns, again and again, to the concept of language-games to make clear his lines of thought concerning language. Primitive language-games are scrutinized for the insights they afford on this or that characteristic of language. Thus, the builders' language-game (PI 2), in which a builder and his assistant use exactly four terms (block, pillar, slab, beam), is utilized to illustrate that part of the Augustinian picture of language which might be correct but which is, nevertheless, strictly limited. "Regular" language-games, such as the astonishing list provided in PI 23 (which includes, e.g., reporting an event, speculating about an event, forming and testing a hypothesis, making up a story, reading it, play- acting, singing catches, guessing riddles, making a joke, translating, asking, thanking, and so on), bring out the openness of our possibilities in using language and in describing it.

Some properties of language-games can be noticed in Wittgenstein's several examples and comments. They are, first, a part of a broader context termed by Wittgenstein a form of life (see below). Secondly, the concept of language-games points at the rule-governed character of language. This does not entail strict and definite systems of rules for each and every language-game, but points to the conventional nature of this sort of human activity. Finally, Wittgenstein's choice of ‘game’ is based on the over-all analogy between language and game, assuming that we have a clearer perception of what games are. Still, just as we cannot give a final, essential definition of ‘game’, so we cannot find "what is common to all these activities and what makes them into language or parts of language" (PI 65).

It is here that Wittgenstein's rejection of general explanations, and definitions based on sufficient and necessary conditions, is best pronounced. Instead of these symptoms of the philosopher's "craving for generality", he points to ‘family resemblance’ as the more suitable analogy for the means of connecting particular uses of the same word. There is no reason to look, as we have done traditionally — and dogmatically — for one, essential core in which the meaning of a word is located and which is, therefore, common to all uses of that word. We should, instead, travel with the word's uses through "a complicated network of similarities, overlapping and criss-crossing" (PI 66). Family resemblance also serves to exhibit the lack of boundaries and the distance from exactness that characterize different uses of the same concept. Such boundaries and exactness are the definitive traits of form — be it Platonic form, Aristotelian form, or the general form of a proposition adumbrated in the Tractatus. It is from such forms that applications of concepts can be deduced, but this is precisely what Wittgenstein now eschews in favor of appeal to similarity of a kind with family resemblance.

3.5 Rule-following
One of the issues most associated with the later Wittgenstein is that of rule-following. Rising out of the considerations above, it becomes another central point of discussion in the question of what it is that can apply to all the uses of a word. The same dogmatic stance as before has it that a rule is an abstract entity — transcending all of its particular applications; knowing the rule involves grasping that abstract entity and thereby knowing how to use it.

Wittgenstein begins his exposition by introducing an example: "… we get [a] pupil to continue a series (say + 2) beyond 1000 — and he writes 1000, 1004, 1008, 1012 (PI 185)". What do we do, and what does it mean, when the student, upon being corrected, answers "But I went on in the same way"? Wittgenstein proceeds (mainly in PI 185-243, but also elsewhere) to dismantle the cluster of attendant questions: How do we learn rules? How do we follow them? Wherefrom the standards which decide if a rule is followed correctly? Are they in the mind, along with a mental representation of the rule? Do we appeal to intuition in their application? Are they socially and publicly taught and enforced? In typical Wittgensteinian fashion, the answers are not pursued positively; rather, the very formulation of the questions as legitimate questions with coherent content is put to the test. For indeed, it is both the Platonistic and mentalistic pictures which underlie asking questions of this type, and Wittgenstein is intent on freeing us from their bewitchment. Such liberation involves elimination of the need to posit any sort of external or internal authority beyond the actual applications of the rule.

These considerations lead to PI 201, often considered the climax of the issue: "This was our paradox: no course of action could be determined by a rule, because every course of action can be made out to accord with the rule. The answer was: if everything can be made out to accord with the rule, then it can also be made out to conflict with it. And so there would be neither accord nor conflict." Wittgenstein's formulation of the problem, now at the point of being a "paradox", has given rise to a wealth of interpretation and debate since it is clear to all that this is the crux of the general issue of meaning, and of understanding and using a language. One of the influential readings of the problem of following a rule has been the skeptical interpretation, according to which Wittgenstein is here voicing a skeptical paradox and offering a skeptical solution. This avenue of reading Wittgenstein commits one to a solution which, often enough, is a skeptical solution put in terms of "there is no fact of the matter" determining the right application of the rule. Whether this answer is indeed a skeptical one is also a point at issue. If it identifies the rule and its application, that is, if we proceed to explicate the way we, or the student, do follow the rule — for instance, by appealing to conventional social behavior — then such explication is not necessarily skeptical.

3.6 Private Language, Grammar and Form of Life
Three celebrated notions, which are closely related, ensue in the Wittgensteinian conversation: private language, form of life, and the notion of grammar. Directly following the rule-following sections in PI, and therefore easily thought to be the upshot of the discussion, are those sections called by interpreters "the private-language argument". Whether it be a veritable argument or not (and Wittgenstein never labeled it as such), these sections point out that for an utterance to be meaningful it must be possible in principle to subject it to public standards and criteria of correctness. For this reason, a private- language, in which "individual words … are to refer to what can only be known to the person speaking; to his immediate private sensations … " (PI 243), is not a genuine, meaningful, rule-governed language. The signs in language can only function when there is a possibility of judging the correctness of their use, "so the use of [a] word stands in need of a justification which everybody understands" (PI 261).

Wittgenstein adopts the term ‘grammar’ in his quest to describe the workings of this public, socially governed language, using it in a somewhat idiosyncratic manner. Grammar, usually taken to consist of the rules of correct syntactic and semantic usage, becomes, in Wittgenstein's hands, the wider — and more elusive — network of rules which determine what linguistic move is allowed as making sense, and what isn't. This notion replaces the stricter and purer logic which played such an essential role in the Tractatus in providing a scaffolding for language and the world. Indeed, "Essence is expressed by grammar … Grammar tells what kind of object anything is. (Theology as grammar)" (PI 371, 373). The "rules" of grammar are not mere technical instructions from on-high for correct usage; rather, they express the norms for meaningful language. Contrary to empirical statements, rules of grammar describe how we use words in order to both justify and criticize our particular utterances. But as opposed to grammar-book rules, they are not idealized as an external system to be conformed to. Moreover, they are not appealed to explicitly in any formulation, but are used in cases of philosophical perplexity to clarify where language misleads us into false illusions. Thus, "I can know what someone else is thinking, not what I am thinking. It is correct to say ‘I know what you are thinking’, and wrong to say ‘I know what I am thinking.’ (A whole cloud of philosophy condensed into a drop of grammar.)" (PI, p.222).

Grammar is not abstract, it is situated within the regular activity with which language-games are interwoven: " … the term ‘language-game’ is meant to bring into prominence the fact that the speaking of language is part of an activity, or of a form of life" (PI 23). What enables language to function and therefore must be accepted as "given" is precisely forms of life. In Wittgenstein's terms, agreement is required "not only in definitions but also (queer as this may sound) in judgments" (PI 242), and this is "not agreement in opinions but in form of life" (PI 241). Used by Wittgenstein sparingly — five times in the Investigations — this intriguing concept has given rise to interpretative quandaries and subsequent contradictory readings. Forms of life can be understood as changing and contingent, dependent on culture, context, history, etc; this appeal to forms of life grounds a relativistic reading of Wittgenstein. On the other hand, it is the form of life common to humankind, "the common behavior of mankind" which is "the system of reference by means of which we interpret an unknown language" (PI 206). This is clearly a universalistic turn, recognizing that the use of language is made possible by the human form of life. Lest this universalism be taken to an extreme, Wittgenstein reminds the reader that as philosophers " … we are not doing natural science, nor yet natural history" (PI p.230).

3.7 The Nature of Philosophy
The later Wittgenstein holds, as he did in the Tractatus, that philosophers do not — or should not — supply a theory, neither do they provide explanations. "Philosophy simply puts everything before us, nor deduces anything. — Since everything lies open to view there is nothing to explain" (PI 126). The anti-theoretical stance is reminiscent of the early Wittgenstein, but there are manifest differences. Although the Tractatus precludes philosophical theories, it does construct a systematic edifice which results in the general form of the proposition, all the while relying on strict formal logic; the Investigations points out the therapeutic non-dogmatic nature of philosophy, verily instructing philosophers in the ways of therapy. "The work of the philosopher consists in assembling reminders for a particular purpose" (PI 127). Working with reminders and series of examples, different problems are solved. Unlike the Tractatus which advanced one philosophical method, in the Investigations "there is not a philosophical method, though there are indeed methods, like different therapies" (PI 133). This is directly related to Wittgenstein's eschewal of the logical form or of any a-priori generalization that can be discovered or made in philosophy. Trying to advance such general theses is a temptation which lures philosophers; but the real task of philosophy is both to make us aware of the temptation and to show us how to overcome it. Consequently "a philosophical problem has the form: ‘I don't know my way about.’" (PI 123), and hence the aim of philosophy is "to shew the fly out of the fly-bottle" (PI 309).

The style of the Investigations is strikingly different from that of the Tractatus. Instead of strictly numbered sections which are organized hierarchically in programmatic order, the Investigations fragmentarily voices aphorisms about language-games, family resemblance, forms of life, "jumping from one topic to another" (PI Preface). This variation in style is of course essential and is "connected with the very nature of the investigation" (PI Preface). As a matter of fact, Wittgenstein was acutely aware of the contrast between the two stages of his thought, advising publication of both texts together in order to make the contrast obvious and clear.

Still, it is precisely via the subject of the nature of philosophy that the fundamental continuity between these two stages, rather than the discrepancy between them, is to be found. In both cases philosophy serves, first, as critique of language. It is through analyzing language's illusive power that the philosopher can expose the traps of meaningless philosophical formulations. This means that what was formerly thought of as a philosophical problem may now dissolve "and this simply means that the philosophical problems should completely disappear" (PI 133). Two implications of this diagnosis, easily traced back in the Tractatus, are to be recognized. One is the inherent dialogical character of philosophy, which is a responsive activity: difficulties and torments are encountered which are then to be dissipated by philosophical therapy. In the Tractatus, this took the shape of advice: "The correct method in philosophy would really be the following: to say nothing except what can be said, i.e. propositions of natural science … and then whenever someone else wanted to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had failed to give a meaning to certain signs in his propositions" (TLP 6.53) The second, more far- reaching, "discovery" in the Investigations "is the one that makes me capable of stopping doing philosophy when I want to" (PI 133). This has been taken to revert back to the ladder metaphor and the injunction to silence in the Tractatus.

3.8 After the Investigations
The second part of the Philosophical Investigations was not intended as such by Wittgenstein. Vagaries of editorial decisions are responsible for its inclusion in the published text, but as the editors themselves say, these comments were written between 1946-1949, i.e., after the conclusion of the text which Wittgenstein planned to submit for publication. It is now widely agreed that the writings of the period from 1946 until his death (1951) constitute a distinctive phase of Wittgenstein's thought. These writings include, in addition to the second part of the Investigations, texts edited and collected in volumes such as Remarks on Colour, Remarks on the Philosophy of Psychology, Zettel, On Certainty, and parts of The Foundations of Mathematics. Besides dealing with mathematics and psychology, this is the stage at which Wittgenstein most seriously pursued questions traditionally recognized as epistemological. On Certainty tackles skeptical doubts and foundational solutions but is, in typical Wittgensteinian fashion, a work of therapy which discounts presuppositions common to both. This is intimately related to another of On Certainty's themes — the primacy of the deed to the word, or, in Wittgenstein's PI terminology, of form of life to grammar. The general tenor of all the writings of this last period can thence be viewed as, on the one hand, a move away from the critical (some would say destructive) positions of the Investigations to a more positive perspective on the same problems that had been tasking him since his early writings; on the other hand, this move does not constitute a break from the later period but is more properly viewed as its continuation, in a new light.

Bibliography
Wittgenstein's Works
The Blue and Brown Books (BB), 1958, Oxford: Blackwell.
Culture and Value, 1980, G.H. von Wright (ed.), P. Winch (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Last Writings on the Philosophy of Psychology, vol. 1, 1982, vol. 2, 1992, G.H. von Wright and H. Nyman (eds.), trans. C.G. Luckhardt and M.A.E. Aue (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
"A Lecture on Ethics", 1965, The Philosophical Review 74: 3-12.
Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology and Religious Belief, 1966, C. Barrett (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Letters to C.K. Ogden with Comments on the English Translation of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 1973, G.H. von Wright (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Letters to Russell, Keynes and Moore, 1974, G.H. von Wright and B.F. McGuinness (eds.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Ludwig Wittgenstein and the Vienna Circle: Conversations Recorded by Friedrich Waismann, 1979, B.F. McGuinness (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Notebooks 1914-1916, 1961, G.H. von Wright and G.E.M. Anscombe (eds.), Oxford: Blackwell.
On Certainty, 1969, G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe and D. Paul (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Philosophical Grammar, 1974, R. Rhees (ed.), A. Kenny (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Philosophical Investigations (PI), 1953, G.E.M. Anscombe and R. Rhees (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Philosophical Occasions, 1993, J. Klagge and A. Nordmann (eds.), Indianapolis: Hackett.
Philosophical Remarks, 1964, R. Rhees (ed.), R. Hargreaves and R. White (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
ProtoTractatus — An Early Version of Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus, 1971, B.F. McGuinness, T. Nyberg, G.H. von Wright (eds.), D.F. Pears and B.F. McGuinness (trans.), Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971).
Remarks on Colour, 1977, G.E.M. Anscombe (ed.), L. McAlister and M. Schaettle (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
"Remarks on Frazer's Golden Bough", 1967, R. Rhees (ed.), Synthese 17: 233-253.
Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics, 1956, G.H. von Wright, R. Rhees and G.E.M. Anscombe (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell, revised edition 1978.
Remarks on the Philosophy of Psychology, 1980, vol. 1, G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (trans.), vol. 2, G.H. von Wright and H. Nyman (eds.), C.G. Luckhardt and M.A.E. Aue (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (TLP), 1922, C.K. Ogden (trans.), London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Originally published as "Logisch-Philosophische Abhandlung", in Annalen der Naturphilosophische Vol. XIV, 3/4, 1921.
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, 1961, D.F. Pears and B.F. McGuinness (trans.), New York: Humanities Press.
Wittgenstein: Conversations, 1949-1951, 1986, O.K. Bouwsma; J.L. Kraft and R.H. Hustwit (eds.), Indianapolis: Hackett.
Wittgenstein's Lectures, Cambridge 1930-1932, 1980, D. Lee (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein's Lectures, Cambridge 1932-1935, 1979, A. Ambrose (ed.), Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein's Lectures on the Foundations of Mathematics, 1976, C. Diamond (ed.), Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Wittgenstein's Lectures on Philosophical Psychology 1946- 47, 1988, P.T. Geach (ed.), London: Harvester.
Zettel, 1967, G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright (eds.), G.E.M. Anscombe (trans.), Oxford: Blackwell.
The Collected Manuscripts of Ludwig Wittgenstein on Facsimile CD Rom, 1997, The Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Secondary Sources: Biographies and Historical Background
Hacker, P.M.S., 1996, Wittgenstein's Place in Twentieth-century Analytic Philosophy, Oxford: Blackwell.
Janik, Allan, and Stephen Toulmin, 1973, Wittgenstein's Vienna, New York: Simon and Schuster.
Malcolm, N., 1958, Ludwig Wittgenstein: A Memoir, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McGuinness, B., 1988, Wittgenstein, a Life: Young Wittgenstein (1889-1929), Pelican.
Monk, Ray, 1990, Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius, New York: Macmillan.
Collections of Essays
Block, Ned, (ed.), 1981, Perspectives on the Philosophy of Wittgenstein, Oxford: Blackwell.
Canfield, John V., (ed.), 1986, The Philosophy of Wittgenstein, vols. 1-15, New York: Garland Publishers.
Copi, I.M., and R.W. Beard, (eds.), 1966, Essays on Wittgenstein's Tractatus, London: Routledge.
Crary, Alice and Rupert Read, (eds.), 2000, The New Wittgenstein, London: Routledge.
Griffiths, A.P., (ed.), 1991, Wittgenstein: Centenary Essays, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Griffiths, A.P., (ed.), 1991, Wittgenstein: Centenary Essays, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele, and William H. Brenner, (eds.), 2005, Readings of Wittgenstein's On Certainty, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shanker, S.G., (ed.), 1986, Ludwig Wittgenstein: Critical Assessments, vols.1-5, Beckenham: Croom Helm.
Sluga, Hans D., and David G. Stern, (eds.), 1996, The Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vesey, G., (ed.), 1974, Understanding Wittgenstein, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Introductions and Commentaries
Anscombe, G.E.M., 1959, An Introduction to Wittgenstein's Tractatus, London: Hutchinson.
Biletzki, Anat, 2003, (Over)Interpreting Wittgenstein, Leiden: Kluwer.
Black, Max, 1967, A Companion to Wittgenstein's Tractatus, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Baker, G.P., and P.M.S. Hacker, 1980, Wittgenstein: Understanding and Meaning, Volume 1 of an Analytical Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.
Baker, G.P., and P.M.S. Hacker, 1985, Wittgenstein: Rules, Grammar and Necessity, Volume 2 of an Analytical Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.
Cavell, S., 1969, Must We Mean What We Say?, New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Diamond, C., 1991, The Realistic Spirit, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Fogelin, R.J., 1987, Wittgenstein, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1976, 2nd edition 1987.
Glock, Hans-Johann, 1996, A Wittgenstein Dictionary, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hacker, P.M.S., 1972, Insight and Illusion: Themes in the Philosophy of Wittgenstein, , Oxford: Clarendon Press; 2nd revised edition, 1986.
Hacker, P.M.S., 1990, Wittgenstein: Meaning and Mind, Volume 3 of an Analytical Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hacker, P.M.S., 1996, Wittgenstein: Mind and Will, Volume 4 of an Analytical Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.
Hintikka, M.B., and J. Hintikka, 1986, Investigating Wittgenstein, Oxford: Blackwell.
Kenny, A., 1973, Wittgenstein, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Kripke, S., 1982, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language: An Elementary Exposition, Oxford, Blackwell.
Malcolm, N., 1986, Nothing is Hidden, Oxford: Blackwell.
McGinn, Colin, 1984, Wittgenstein on Meaning, Oxford: Blackwell.
Mounce, H.O., 1981, Wittgenstein's Tractatus: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell.
Pears, David F., 1987, 1988, The False Prison, vols. I and II, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, David G., 2004, Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stroll, Avrum, 1994, Moore and Wittgenstein on Certainty, New York: Oxford University Press.
Other Internet Resources
The Austrian Ludwig Wittgenstein Society (ALWS)
The North American Wittgenstein Society
The Wittgenstein Archives
Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889-1951)
Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language
Papers of Ludwig Wittgenstein
Wittgenstein Links

No comments: