Understanding Wittgenstein's On Certainty

by Danièle Moyal-Sharrock

This book sheds unprecedented light on Wittgenstein's third masterpiece, On Certainty , clarifying his thoughts on basic beliefs and rebuttal of scepticism. As an introduction and commentary on Wittgenstein's final major philosophical work, Moyal-Sharrock's book will prove an indispensable guide to the student, scholar and general reader.

Genres: Philosophy

262 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[Evan Micheals · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wow that was hard going. It took me 5 months to get through the 220 pages, and everyone was a bit of a slog. It felt about 5 years beyond my reading age, as most of the concepts seemed to be beyond me, or to complex for my tiny brain to comprehend. I would have like more metaphors to pull it together so a lay reader like me had more of a chance to “get it”. Maybe it was written for professional philosophers (not amateurs like me).

I did glean from it concepts of scaffolding and hinges which I will believe and take forward in my own intellectual life. Honestly, finishing the book was a relief more than anything.

I did reflect on some passages of the book and how I could use it to move forward with my understanding of life (as I have written below).

“To believe in something or someone is to believe it or him to be valuable, not to believe that it or he is valuable. To believe in science is to believe science to be valuable. To believe in the American Way is to believe the American way to be a good thing. And so on” (p 204). I am trying to figure out the human condition and why we see the world so differently. This might explain it somewhat. If we only believe in what we find valuable, we go about our lives seeing tools that might be useful to we pick them up because of there utility to us. Others might pass by the same tools because they cannot see the utility in them. Some many disagreements occur over tools. The concepts of racism, sexism etc are useful for some people but completely pointless to others. People attempt to compel other to see the usefulness of their tools.

A disagreement might be over the use of conceptual tools that people use to move forward (towards enlightenment). A person engaged in private enterprise might not see the utility of Unions, they do not help him move forward. An employee might take the opposite belief, because they are a tool of protection. So to change a person’s perspective you must show how the tool is useful to them. This might not be possible. Thus, you will have to agree to disagree.

So given I am at the centre of my own universe (as everyone is). When is disagreement I should ask “How will this belief help me move forward (towards life goals, enlightenment, maturity, etc)?” Failure to do this would indicate it is not a belief that is valid for me to adopt. My failure to show how this belief will move the person, whom I am having a disagreement with, forward should have us agreeing to disagree, wishing each other luck on our own paths.

Adopting a belief that does not move you forward might mean that you are a tool of the belief.

“Objective certainty, like religious belief, is ultimately an enacted faith. On hinge beliefs are visible in our attitude, in our acting and practice, and can be acquired only through emulation, assimilation and performance. Much like a ‘tradition’, they are ‘not something a man can learn; not a thread he can pick up when he feels like; any more than a man can choose his own ancestors’. Those who would require conversion into our form of life would have had another tradition. In order to adhere to our form of life, to react like human beings, they would need be again, act again as little children (p 214)”.

What I get from this is that we do not own our own certainty. Our certainty is hinged by scaffolding so complex and unknowable to ourselves, yet so there. We are blind who we are, and even more blind to others. How can we know our selves with any certainty? It is impossible to know another. It is hard not to disappear into nihilism.

In a weird way I accept and reject nihilism. I accept its truth, but reject its implications. To have a purpose or meaning in ones life is psychologically important. Nihilism is the opposite of meaning or purpose. We must create purpose and meaning in our scaffolding for life to be worth living. This requires a lot of hinge beliefs. I suspect that some of our scaffolding is vital and we cannot be aware of it, it has literally been passed down by our ancestors. Maybe it is a good idea to leave others alone. Psychologically, do not try to take apart their scaffolding unless they are actively looking to take it apart and reconstruct it themselves.

[Koopa · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first half of the book is good and gives a plausible rendering of Wittgenstein's nonepistemic hinges. The last half is mostly a pointless classification of hinges that doesn't really do anything to elucidate their nature (which is to be expected given how language works and Wittgenstein's anti-theoretical stance towards these types of classifications in philosophy). Also, some ink is spilled on whether or not to use "belief" in regard to these nonepistemic hinges - again, another pointless question. There's also a lot of repeated content throughout, making the same point as was made in the previous chapter.

[Bogdan Pammer]

Moyal-Sharrocks reading for OC or the "third Wittgenstein." Strong focus on "hinge propositions" and their workings.