[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 92 KB, 500x374, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044126 No.6044126 [Reply] [Original]

>yfw Wittgenstein didn't read any major philosophers except Frege and Russell until after he had completed his work as a philosopher

>> No.6044129

>>6044126
>there were other major philosophers to read

>> No.6044130

>>6044129
Are you going to call me a charlatan?

>> No.6044133

>>6044130
Is your name Zizek?

>> No.6044134

>>6044133
No, but I am a Lacanian.

>> No.6044135
File: 36 KB, 666x408, Analytic Philosophy vs.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044135

>>6044134
That would do it.

>> No.6044138

>>6044135
I have never seen such a problematic image. It's all just a reference to Russell and Wittgenstein against Nietzsche based on Russell's History of Western Philosophy. No substance at all.

>> No.6044139

>>6044135
>he believes in dichotomies

go back to reddit you cunt

>> No.6044145

>>6044135
I originally made that image. The only thing I would change is 'unsubstantiated opinions' to 'baseless posturing'.

>> No.6044146
File: 26 KB, 460x288, Berty Smoking.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044146

>>6044139
Your second sentence does not follow from the first. You have committed an error in reasoning, your opinion has been discarded.

>> No.6044150

>>6044145
Doing god's work anon.

>> No.6044176

>>6044135
Actually; "I feel myself to occupy, quite unfortunately after all, a position neither of rigorous study in either the sciences or the arts or a position to enjoy myself and my company but instead one of those queasy middle grounds where anything I say will come across alarmingly off the subject. The genre of philosophy came about to capture effervescent notions that flit through your mind while you do your daily business but which nevertheless may enjoin some kind of entailment. The possibility that you may have a thought that buffers up against the as of yet discovered has chances slimmer than what most could conceive of as remedially worth while. Instead most philosophical thoughts swirl about already known notions that the philosophic individual has yet to grasp. Those who reach the highest echelons of science, art, mechanics, and whathaveyou we call scientists, mechanics, and artists. The best the field of philosophy has to offer has to do with invention; invention residing in that space without clearly defined limits while nevertheless requiring definition."

>> No.6044202

>>6044146
Oh ny dear god I want to splooge all over his face

>> No.6044216

>>6044176
Tripe.

>> No.6044246
File: 6 KB, 252x209, 1255518650578.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044246

>>6044145
>not acknowledging the value of genealogy

Anon, please.

>> No.6044281

wittgenstein couldnt read actually

>> No.6044285

>>6044246
Define genealogy, I know you types have different definitions for words.

>> No.6044335

>>6044126
Source ? Witty came from a very upper-class and well-educated family, I find that rather hard to believe.

>> No.6044342

>>6044285
A method to trace and uncover the history of an idea or concept to understand the underlying assumptions and implications. Ignoring that renders you shit-tier philosophy instantly. The same goes for not recognizing the works of Nietzsche.

>> No.6044355

>>6044126
That's simply not true. He learnt Danish just so he could read Kierkegaard in the original for fuck's sake.

>> No.6044359

>>6044335
>Wittgenstein often revealed (or perhaps 'boasted' is the word) to friends that he had never read a word of Aristotle. Evidently, he felt that he did not need to. If the works of Frege and Russell had indeed brought about an advance in Logic comparable to that which made astronomy out of astrology and chemistry out of alchemy, then Aristotle's work - like that of, say, Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, Hegel and Mill (none of which Wittgenstein ever read) - was as obsolete as the works of the mediaeval alchemists.
How to Read Wittgenstein Chapter I. Monk, R. Granta Books, London, UK (2005)

>> No.6044371

>>6044176
>queasy middle grounds
Le Trashman time.

>> No.6044372

>>6044359
It's strange how Witty sometimes behaved like your typical "analytics only" /sci troll.

But really, none of that prevents him to have read works of philosophers chronologically closer to him, like Kierkegaard (>>6044355) or Godël. Given the importance of religiosity in his philosophy, I find it strange that his only references are Frege and Russell.

>> No.6044375

>>6044355
>Kierkegaard
>major

>> No.6044377

>>6044372
No, he was only that way when he was young, he recanted on his attitudes later in life, well after Tractatus, though, and read some other philosophers.

>> No.6044379

>>6044134
Idiot detected

>> No.6044386

>>6044375
In this case we can just as well say Frege and Russell are the only major philosophers, which would imply that the statement "X didn't read any major philosophers other than Frege and Russell" is always true.

>>6044377
Who were the philosophy he mentioned has helping him changing his mind (or those who suspect did, if he didn't comment on it) ?

>> No.6044387

>>6044342
But Nietzsche is the most overrated philosopher of all time

>> No.6044391

>>6044386
I don't know what changed his mind, but he read Plato and Kant eventually. It was probably just age that turned him around.

>> No.6044394

>>6044342
So, a big genetic fallacy?

>> No.6044405

>thinking you have to read a lot of philosophers

dumb scholars forced this shitty meme

>> No.6044425

>>6044405
I can always pretend that I have read them.

>> No.6044432

>>6044394
Ideas don't have genes, you know. That's only for biological creatures like humans, monkey, plants or even viruses.

You should study more science, it wouls benefit your understanding of philosophy.

>>6044405
Ten is not "a lot".

>> No.6044438

do you think he ever had sex

>> No.6044447
File: 40 KB, 261x260, 1420784155886.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044447

>>6044432
>Ideas don't have genes
I hope you're trolling with this misunderstanding of genetic fallacy.

>> No.6044448

>>6044438
With men, yes

>> No.6044457

>>6044377
Older Wittgenstein should be ignored.

>> No.6044461

>>6044447
I was messing with you, but what >>6044342 described isn't a genetic fallacy, he's not reducing an idea to its origins, but simply stating that ideas are phenomenon who are best understood if you remember they have history.

>> No.6044468

>>6044432
>there are more than 10 philosophers worth reading

>> No.6044490

>>6044461
Even Richard Dawkins knows that, he talks about it all the time. He even wrote a book about it, Climbing Mount Improbable, in the 90s.

>> No.6044508
File: 3 KB, 126x126, 1332098748622s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044508

>>6044375
>believing Kierkegaard is not a major philosopher

You be trollin' son? :D

>> No.6044515

>>6044394
People referring to fallacys like they are laws of nature is one of the reasons why genealogy is necessary.

>> No.6044521

>>6044508
I guess he is major if you are a warrior of daydreams.

>> No.6044522

>>6044468
I never implying that. Actually I think there are exactly nine philosophers worth reading and one worth re-reading.

>> No.6044529

>>6044522
care to name them?

>> No.6044539

>>6044515
Committing a fallacy is, by definition, making an invalid argument.

>> No.6044548

>>6044529
Zizek

>> No.6044561

>>6044529
Frege, Moore, Russell, Ayer, Wittgenstein, Popper, Kripke, Putnam, Dennett.

>> No.6044566

>>6044561

Pig disgusting.

>dennett

Oh, it's just a ruse. Carry on

>> No.6044569

>>6044529
I never said they had to be the same for everyone. Go out and find you nine read-worthy philosophers.

>> No.6044578

>>6044561
Dennett but no Quine?

>> No.6044582

>>6044578
Quine hurt the movement more than helping it.

>> No.6044584

>>6044582
lol what

>> No.6044587

>>6044561
lmao

>> No.6044591
File: 145 KB, 304x422, screen-shot-2011-06-01-at-5-44-24-pm.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044591

>>6044587
>he thinks his opinion matters
GTFO,continental.

>> No.6044594

>>6044582
how do you mean?

>> No.6044619

>>6044335
This. It is known he was read enough to understand Decline of the West and that /r9k/ kantian Otto.

>> No.6044633
File: 146 KB, 460x585, ffc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6044633

>>6044246

>> No.6044691

Wittgenstein read Frege, Russell, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, and pulp detective fiction.

>>6044561
What a mess of people.

>> No.6045037

>>6044126
this is incorrect.
A decent cut of Philosophical Investigations is him dueling with the ghost of Thomas Aquinas who he most certainly read.
His religious ideas were heavily, and openly, influenced by Kierkegaard.
And considering that half of PI takes a position against forms and doubt it seems unlikely that he skipped his Descartes or Plato either.

>> No.6045472

>>6044126

Wittgenstein, besides the corrections everybody else here has given you, was also in long, intense, and frequent philosophical conversation with a number of graduate students and professors at Cambridge, including Russel and Moore, whom had all read the standards, and likely would have brought them up, or the points they contained. He was, in addition, formally educated in math, which prepared him for many of his major contributions.

>> No.6046127

>>6044126
>directly references Kant and tacitly references Plato in the Tractatus
>notebooks are filled with references to Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Goethe, Augustine, Tolstoy, Freud, and Spengler.

I'd agree that Wittgenstein is comparatively weak on the history of philosophy, but to say that he didn't read anything is wrong. Fuck you OP.

>> No.6046336

>>6045037
>I know more about Wittgenstein than Ray Monk

>> No.6046340

>>6046127
See >>6046336