Atieh Zandieh
Abstract
Since Wittgenstein is known for his two philosophies, one of the concerns of interpreters of his thoughts is to understand the relation between his two philosophies. Hutto is one of the interpreters who have endeavored to identify a reliable relation between Wittgenstein’s philosophies in order ...
Read More
Since Wittgenstein is known for his two philosophies, one of the concerns of interpreters of his thoughts is to understand the relation between his two philosophies. Hutto is one of the interpreters who have endeavored to identify a reliable relation between Wittgenstein’s philosophies in order to present a coherent and consistent interpretation of these philosophies. In his view, this approach results in resolving superficial and profound conflicts in Wittgenstein’s philosophies. In Hutto’s words, an integrated basis that relates Wittgenstein’s two philosophies is Wittgenstein’s “end of philosophy”, and his attitude towards “nature and meaning of language”. Based on Hutto’s interpretation, in two of Wittgenstein’s intellectual periods, the end of philosophy was ‘description’, but Wittgenstein’s philosophical attitude towards the nature of language was evolved: an evolution from logical form to form of life. Hutto attempts to show that this evolution was not Wittgenstein’s main intention and it emerged through the method he applied for offering his thoughts. In Hutto’s view, Wittgenstein’s attitude in his second philosophy is correct, based on the ‘functional attitude’ and his attitude in his first philosophy is faulty, based on the ‘picture theory’, and this fault results from Wittgenstein’s confusion. He intends to extend the second philosophy method to the first philosophy in order to interpret the whole philosophy by one end and attitude. Although his conclusion is exquisite, it results in the conclusion that in Tractatus, there is no substantial point worth keeping.
Mozhgan Khalili; Ali Akbar Ahmadi Aframjani
Abstract
Kripke’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s investigations separates into two parts: “Skeptical paradox” and “Private language argument”. The investigations focus on a Semantic Skepticism Paradox tied with Rule-following, and its other important problems should be interpreted ...
Read More
Kripke’s interpretation of Wittgenstein’s investigations separates into two parts: “Skeptical paradox” and “Private language argument”. The investigations focus on a Semantic Skepticism Paradox tied with Rule-following, and its other important problems should be interpreted in the same way. The subject of this research is the analysis of Kripke’s unrealistic interpretation of meaning through grammar interpretation of the word “skepticism”. Kripke shows that an unrealistic view of meaning is in the ordinary of language games and related to its creative nature within an unlimited variety, and meaning arises from a special relationship between language and realism that exists inside the form of life under specific conditions. And this gives different dimensions to the grammar of meaning base on its place and nature inside. As a result of this analysis, the meaning has many different dimensions in the course of our active life and can only in one of its uses be used as a realistic view of meaning and we cannot generalize the grammar of this specific use to the other grammars and uses.
