amir samsami; jahangir masoodi
Abstract
Subjectivism as an epistemological schema is a fundamental element of modern thought. This schema was based on the Cartesian cogito and considering human as the “thinking substance”, and with Kant’s transcendental Philosophy and granting human a self-grounded role in the act of cognition, ...
Read More
Subjectivism as an epistemological schema is a fundamental element of modern thought. This schema was based on the Cartesian cogito and considering human as the “thinking substance”, and with Kant’s transcendental Philosophy and granting human a self-grounded role in the act of cognition, it gained unique importance in the Human Knowledge of the New Age. However, with the beginning of the 20th century and the paradigmatic changes that occurred in Philosophy, thoughts appeared that strongly challenged the schema of subjectivism, this substantial foundation of modern thinking. Meanwhile, Wittgenstein is one of the philosophers who has made the most of his efforts to overcome this schema in his Philosophy. The present paper tries to measure the relation between Wittgenstein’s early and later thought with regards to modern subjectivism, and at the same time, strives to demonstrate the degree to which Wittgenstein's efforts have been successful toward transitioning past subjectivism in each period. On this basis, the first part of the article, with a transcendental reading of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus will show that Wittgenstein, while attempting to abandon the schema of subjectivism, continues to adhere to Kant's subjective approach. And in the second part, while referring to Wittgenstein's novel way of inquiring regarding philosophical issues, the paper will investigate how to transition from subjectivism in his later thought.
hamidreza mohammadi; mohammadreza abdolahnezad
Abstract
Saul. A. Kripke in his Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language reads Wittgenstein’s private language argument as an inference from the idea of rule following. He presents a sceptical paradox about rule- following, which purports to show all language, all concept formation, to be impossible, ...
Read More
Saul. A. Kripke in his Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language reads Wittgenstein’s private language argument as an inference from the idea of rule following. He presents a sceptical paradox about rule- following, which purports to show all language, all concept formation, to be impossible, indeed unintelligible. In this paper we will examine one of the most important outcomes of Kripkenstein’s sceptical solution, namely “The Community view” according to which, the concept of a private language is inconsistent, because using language entails following rules, and following rules entails being a member of community. This view believes that solitary or private rule-following is impossible and language is essentially social; hence it’s impossible for someone isolated from birth to follow a rule or use language. At the end we will attempt to settle this longstanding and significant dispute, by shedding some lights on the terms used by these antagonists such as Wittgenstein’s conceptions of language, essence and Crusoe.
Abdul Razzaq Hesamifar
Volume 11, Issue 41 , April 2015, , Pages 49-68
Abstract
Abstract
The refuting of private language is one of the important ideas of later Wittgenstein; a language whose words are only known for its user. To justify impossibility of the private language, Wittgenstein in his diary argument shows that it is impossible for a person to name one of his own sensations ...
Read More
Abstract
The refuting of private language is one of the important ideas of later Wittgenstein; a language whose words are only known for its user. To justify impossibility of the private language, Wittgenstein in his diary argument shows that it is impossible for a person to name one of his own sensations by using a sign like “S” and to write it in his diary and then he cannot register its repetition in his diary. There are many interpretations of this argument. Some consider it as an argument against the validity of memory and some others consider it as an emphasis on the necessity of rules for using the words in a language. Skepticism in the validity of memory sometime is related to the ability of memory in keeping the first sensation and sometime is related to the ability of memory in correct remembering of using of a sign in the past. The commentators mostly accepted the first part and according to their view, since there is no objective criterion for assessment of use of a sign, the possibility of assessing the correctness of memory function in private language is denied. In this article, some interpretations of diarist argument are investigated.
�Q�ҁQ�ӁQ�ӁQ�ӁQ�ӀQ�ӁR�ӀR�ӀQ�ӀQ�ҁQ�ҀQ�ӀQ�یشتر شق نخست را برگرفتند و به هر حال امکان احراز درستی عملکرد حافظه را در زبان خصوصی به این دلیل منتفی دانستند که معیاری عینی برای بازسنجی کاربردهای یک نشانه وجود ندارد. در این مقاله برخی تفاسیر از استدلال خاطرهنویس بررسی شدهاست.
mohammad ali abdillahi; fatemeh farahanian
Abstract
One of the most important and novel philosophical issues proposed by Wittgenstein in his late stage of thought and in his influential book Philosophical Investigations is the issue of private language. This issue is so important that one can say the epistemology of second half of twentieth century is ...
Read More
One of the most important and novel philosophical issues proposed by Wittgenstein in his late stage of thought and in his influential book Philosophical Investigations is the issue of private language. This issue is so important that one can say the epistemology of second half of twentieth century is entirely under its influence. Wittgenstein believes that the only way to get rid of epistemological and semantic skepticism is the rejection of private language. Furthermore, the problem of other minds, which has been an insoluble problem due to acceptance of the theory of private language, becomes fundamentally dissolved by rejecting the private language. While other solutions to the problem of other minds such as the argument from analogy and behaviorism suffer from many problems
