[ 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: 50 KB, 635x854, Wittgenstein.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5430050 No.5430050 [Reply] [Original]

Hey /lit/

Tomorrow at 6pm GMT (11am Arizona time) our Wittgenstein reading group is meeting up in irc.freenode #4chanWittgenstein. This week we are talking about Wittgenstein's On Certainty, sections 101-250

>> No.5430075

Shit, I haven't read the sections yet. I've been insanely busy this week. Will read before the meeting though.

Do you have a pastebin of last week's meeting? I wanna see where we left off.

>> No.5430134

By 'tomorrow', I mean 'sunday'.

>>5430075

Hey man,

Yeah here is the paste bin of last meeting.

http://pastebin.com/GzQdxsan

>> No.5430152

>>5430050
lol

how fucking queer are you stupid cunts?

>> No.5430160

>>5430134
Will we actually talk about On Sense and Reference or is it just for all of us to figure out what the heck we were talking about last time?

Time to get started on OC though!

>> No.5430179

>>5430160

I'd like to talk about On Sense and Reference. I figure it could be an after hour thing. I re-read On Sense and Reference so I have some notes to go over. I guess we will see if anyone red On Sense and Reference.

>> No.5430195

>>5430179
Cool, I'll try and squeeze that it in (it's fairly short as I remember it).

I'll see ya tomorrow.

>> No.5430737

Almost forgot to read the new sections, been so hooked on Quine and GEB this week.
-J

>> No.5430828

I want to get hold of his philosophy. What books of his should I start with? What's his masterpiece?

>> No.5431041

>>5430828

His only book is TLP.

His posthumously one is Philosophical Investigations where he shits on TLP.

posthumously = not his

>> No.5431053

>>5430050
Wow gay

>> No.5431060

>>5431041
I've never seen anyone hate Von Wright so much after Eskelinen.

>> No.5431082

>>5431060
I hope you never saw anyone else but me hate Von Wright in that case.

>> No.5431106

This may be a pleb question, but why is Wittgenstein so popular?
I mean yeah he's pretty awesome, but why is he way more popular than (e.g.) Feyerabend, Baudrillard, Quine, Ayer, Russell?

>> No.5431126

>>5431106
>Feyerabend
Talked about science, which the majority of people don't care about. Could be argued that he's wrong or at least not as accepted as Kuhn or Popper.
>Baudrillard
Dense and technical prose.
>Quine
Mostly criticized others analyticals like Carnap, didn't invent any catch all concepts like language game.
>Ayer
Died along with Vienna circle.
>Russell
Arguably about as popular, if not more among plebs for his remarks on religion, ethics, social issues and politics.

>> No.5431137

>>5431126
thanks. (Early) Wittgenstein also has dense and technical prose.
Maybe because you get two for the price of one? (early and late)

>> No.5431296

>>5431041

Well thats not quite fair.

Wittgenstein wrote and published the Tractatus (TLP) in his life time. After that he spent around 3 decades writing material, giving lectures, and chairing Cambridges philosophy department. When he died he left behind his notes to his students with the understanding they would be publishing books like Philosophical Investigations (as well as ~10 less popular books).

So its not fair to say Philosophical Investigations isnt his. He wrote it with the understanding that it would be published after his life time.

>>5431106

Yeah I dont know what to say. Its really good philosophy. I think Wittgenstein, uniquely from his peers like Russell, Frege, and Kripke, had a really strong philosophical sense. So Russell and Frege for example I think were brilliant, but their philosophy was kind of confused and foolish.

>>5431126
>Quine

I dont really like Quine, but Ive enjoyed seeing how many books begin by quoting Quine and then criticizing him. There is like a whole class of philosophers who make a positive contribution by being profoundly wrong.

>> No.5431326

>>5431296
All positive contributions to philosophy are wrong.

>> No.5431329

>>5431126
>>Quine
>Mostly criticized others analyticals like Carnap, didn't invent any catch all concepts like language game.

quine made huge positive contributions to philosophy, such as holism about confirmation, the indeterminacy of translation, radical interpretation, naturalized epistemology, ontological commitment, the indispensability argument and so on

>> No.5431372

>>5431329

In what way are those hugely positive?

I tried to study the ontological commitment. It didnt make any sense to me. I am not convinced it actually makes any sense.

I read his book 'Web of Beliefs'. I thought it was awful. I dont like the way he writes either. Its like he is technical in all the wrong places.

>> No.5431379

>>5431106
hes popular merely because of the particular way in which he exposes his ideas. nothing else.

that is what makes a philsopher, not his ideas about whatever he writes, but the way he tells them.

>> No.5431384

>>5430050
>a group of retarded /lit/izens discussing Wittgenstein
Topkek

>> No.5431678

Bump. We are starting to get fired up.

>> No.5431988

>>5431296
>confused and foolish

Alright I get Russell, but Frege? I am not sure you've read Frege after this statement. He never published philosophical work apart maybe from one and mainly focused on linguistics. He's held in high regard for his mathematical brilliance and work as a logician ffs.

>> No.5432011

>>5431384
>retarded /lit/izens

>implying theres anything else here

>> No.5432016

what's the point of having a board where you can "discuss" things when you can have a board where you post links to your circle-jerk to discuss things?

>> No.5432020

>>5432011
Never implied that at all.

>> No.5432022

>>5432020
of course you did, otherwise you would have just said litizens.

>> No.5432137

>>5431988
Ive read these from Frege

On Sense and Reference
Begriffsschrift
Concept and Object
Function and Concept
Foundations of Arithmetic

Its hard for me not to consider Freges contributions as philosophical. Its true that he was a mathematician, and he only tried to talk about math and logic, but he contributed to a philosophic field. He cant claim innocence from philosophic mistake.

I consider Frege brilliant nonetheless. Brilliant and mistaken are not mutually exclusive.

>> No.5432181

Hi people, even tho im not participating in your reading group cause im working on something else atm, i wanted to share these books with you, i read them when i was reading OC (which actually goes coupled with Remarks On Colour and the 2nd volume of Last Witings.) I think they are a good complement.

http://libgen.org/book/index.php?md5=76827971A84B7DD087156B0C14970F6D
http://libgen.org/book/index.php?md5=22065004CAAB5810B8AFD09470924092
http://libgen.org/book/index.php?md5=9E3591632360593C678971211E88CF5F
http://libgen.org/book/index.php?md5=C91C04268B08151034C6C9B258AED4F6

Hope you enjoy your reading and discussions.

>> No.5432207

What Wittgenstein have you guess read so far for the group?

>> No.5432227

>>5432207
For this group? Just On Certainty sections 1-250. There was a group last year that did Philosophical Investigations. Not sure how far along they got ( I heard they didn't finish the whole thing).

>>5432181
Thanks Mitt! I'm always on the look out for good secondary sources.

>> No.5432677

is On Certainty essential? does it present strong criticism towards Witt's previous conceptions?
i'm brazilian but there's only a Portugal's portuguese translation, so i'm thinking of buying an english edition
should i get it?

>> No.5432740 [DELETED] 
File: 24 KB, 227x368, folder.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5432740

well it is essential if one follows his entire work, cause it is a beautiful culmination and exposition of it. in itself id say it is important.

and idk, i think wittgenstein should only be read in the original german or in english (the tranlations have been very carefully made mostly by people who knew him or that are related to those who knew him), whereas foreign translations, no matter how careful, are just made by academics who know little of wittgenstein's actual aims. a recent exception is the last translation of PI in french.

>> No.5432745
File: 20 KB, 226x366, folder.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5432745

>>5432677
well it is essential if one follows his entire work, cause it is a beautiful culmination and exposition of it. in itself id say it is important.

and idk, i think wittgenstein should only be read in the original german or in english (the tranlations have been very carefully made mostly by people who knew him or that are related to those who knew him), whereas foreign translations, no matter how careful, are just made by academics who know little of wittgenstein's actual aims. a recent exception is the last translation of PI in french.

>> No.5432764

>>5432745
i'm fairly familiar with both his early and late work and the translations i've read are pretty respected overall. as On Certainty is a very late work, i assume it has an easier language, but i'm not a native english speaker, so i might have trouble if the language turns out to be convoluted. thanks for the advice anyways

>> No.5432793

>>5432764
oh im not a native english speaker either, but believe me that, even if they are praised or respected (which is usually by the same people who make them), they are not accurate enough. but anyway, one's own master of the language in question is obviously important as well.

>> No.5433080

Cool. So we finished meeting 2 about 30 minutes ago. It went on four almost two hours, and we didnt even get to the after session material 'On Sense and Reference'

Here is a pastbin of today's meeting:
http://pastebin.com/wKbhFCnG

Next meeting is Sept 21st at 6pm GMT. We are reading On Certainty sections 251 to 400.

>> No.5434408

bumpin