What do you think?
Rate this book
Критические биографии #5
Людвиг Витгенштейн
Людвиг Витгенштейн (1889-1951) — один из самых сложных и неоднозначных философов XX века. Ученик Готлоба Фреге и Бертрана Рассела, он стоял у истоков современной аналитической философии. Наследник одного из крупнейших состояний Европы, Витгенштейн следовал идеалам нестяжательства и жил практически в нищете. Один из самых выдающихся умов работал учителем начальных классов, лаборантом в больнице и садовником в монастыре. В течение всей жизни он изводил себя этическими и религиозными вопросами. В своих работах Витгенштейн — разрушитель иллюзий и ложных воззрений, сторонник кристальной ясности стиля и абсолютной честности мысли.
Во второй половине XX века Витгенштейн стал культовой фигурой. О нем писали романы, снимали художественные фильмы и даже сочиняли музыкальные произведения.
В своем исследовании Эдвард Кантерян не только проливает свет на трудноуловимую связь между жизнью философа, отразившей противоречия бурного ХХ века, и его трудами, но и доступно и аккуратно объясняет суть его философских идей от «Логико-философского трактата» (1921) до «Философских исследований» (1953), показывая не романтизированного героя, а Витгенштейна — человека, интеллектуала и философа.
Во второй половине XX века Витгенштейн стал культовой фигурой. О нем писали романы, снимали художественные фильмы и даже сочиняли музыкальные произведения.
В своем исследовании Эдвард Кантерян не только проливает свет на трудноуловимую связь между жизнью философа, отразившей противоречия бурного ХХ века, и его трудами, но и доступно и аккуратно объясняет суть его философских идей от «Логико-философского трактата» (1921) до «Философских исследований» (1953), показывая не романтизированного героя, а Витгенштейна — человека, интеллектуала и философа.
248 pages, Paperback
First published May 30, 2007
22 people are currently reading
180 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
January 9, 2009
Not interested in his philosophy. I just read this book because I thought he was hot.
August 30, 2022
насколько Витгенштейн и его тексты были сложными, настолько же эта книга о нем оказалась простой, и это её сильная сторона! её прочтение - оптимальный первый шаг в сторону знакомства и базового понимания того, чему Витгенштейн посвятил свою жизнь.
в очередной раз убедилась в своей безграничной любви к биографиям. для меня нет ничего интереснее настоящих человеческих историй.
в очередной раз убедилась в своей безграничной любви к биографиям. для меня нет ничего интереснее настоящих человеческих историй.
October 21, 2017
О Витгенштейне всегда интересно, но писать: «За годы затворничества „яйцо“, которое Витгенштейн отложил своим трактатом, стало привлекать всё больше и больше внимания» — пожалуй, чересчур.
April 10, 2020
“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.”
Language is not just the clothing of thought but it’s actually a presupposition for being able to have the articulate thoughts that we humans can have. The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. Or in other words, there could be no thought without language.
This is a bold proposition to say the least but one of tremendous philosophical insight. I stumbled upon Wittgenstein while reviewing Bertrand Russell’s philosophy and I was absolutely captivated with W’s theories on the philosophy of language. His conception of philosophy as a non-scientific linguistic activity is remarkable to say the least. I haven’t been able to stop thinking about his ideas for the last couple of days. The theoretical and philosophical implications of his findings have created ripples throughout time, affecting the core disciplines of theoretical philosophy (philosophy of logic, language and mind).
This is a long review because I’m including my notes on Wittgenstein’s life and philosophy, which are primarily extracted from this book. I do this in order to shed some light on the brilliance of W’s ideas (an introduction). What I find most fascinating about Wittgenstein in relation to other philosophers is how his philosophy evolved over time. I provide an example from his two main works to illustrate this point:
The Tractatus has an aesthetic beauty to it uncommon of most philosophical works. Its aphorisms are thought inducing and its structure is visually stunning and ideal for the content of the book (highly systematic and logical arguments). The writing is concise yet powerful and the implications of its findings were groundbreaking for formal logic. I have encountered few philosophical works like this one. It almost seems like it’s a work of symmetric art, rather than philosophy: ordered statements, logical inferences, rigid structure and simple takeaways (with complex underpinnings).
Philosophical Investigations builds on the ideas Tractatus and directly discredits some. Tractatus sets up the framework for which we can think about the ideas developed in Investigations. W’s style here is diametrically opposed to Tractatus: it covers a great deal of subjects with little regard for aphorisms and style, yet his observations are brilliant in and of themselves (language-games!). In contrast to Tractutus, Investigations is unsystematic in both style and content: its unstructured, it deals with a different number of topics, expands on its various arguments, yet still offers fairly simple takeaways (with just a complex underpinnings as Tractatus). More importantly, the findings from Investigations is what I believe most accurately reflects W’s legacy and school of thought. You can read more about these theories in my notes.
When I think about Wittgenstein’s philosophy,. it’s almost as you track the the evolution of his work: the growth of a systematic seeking youth into a seasoned traveler who has learned the reality of the unsystematic nature of life. For this reason, I find the philosophy of Investigations more philosophically groundbreaking, as I personally believe it more adequately describes the nature of the philosophy of language. I highly recommend Kanterian’s biography as an excellent introduction to his life and theories.
Tractatus: Early Wittgenstein (1921)
Tractatus offers an account of the essence of language (logic), the world (ontology) and their relation (intentionality). It also attempts to clarify the status of mathematics and scientific theories, reconciles solipsism with realism, denounces skepticism, and determines the nature of aesthetics, ethics and mysticism.
Early Wittgenstein argued that philosophy is the totality of all propositions that are taken as unprovable and basic in science.
Takeaway:
• Philosophy is the analysis of language, not the world.
• All philosophy is a critique of language.
Notes on Tractatus:
• Systematic: universal theory of language, applies to all languages.
• We can understand the real structure of our language only through logical analysis.
• The main function of language is to describe the world, and propositions are the smallest units of communication.
o Propositions must be able to be false. Pseudo propositions don’t fulfill this rule.
• His theory of proposition consists of two aspects.
o The first aspect can be summarized by the label ‘logical atomism’. Every atomic object has a metaphysical essence. What is it? It is the totality of all facts in which it can occur.
To find out the real structure of our propositions we must employ logical analysis. All languages have the same deep structure, which we can uncover by formal logic. This is an idea that became very dominant not only in analytic philosophy but also in linguistics, for example, via Noam Chomsky’s theories of generative grammar after the Second World War.
o The second aspect of his theory can be summarized by the label ‘picture theory of proposition’. Propositions are pictures. Every proposition is a description of a possible fact. Giving an account of what a proposition is, what makes it meaningful and how it manages to describe a fact, is of pivotal importance for understanding how any discourse about the world, and in particular scientific discourse, is possible.
Traffic court toy car example: The elements of a picture stand for the objects they depict, and the way the elements are ordered in the picture mirrors the depicted fact. Similarly, the elements of a proposition, the words, stand for the objects they depict.
• Metaphysical propositions
o A proposition that tries to depict some non-contingent fact, for example a ‘metaphysical fact’, which could not be otherwise, is simply meaningless
• Distinction between what can be said, that is, contingent facts about the world, which are the subject matter of science, and what cannot be said, but shows itself – the metaphysical essence of language and the world.
o Said: contingent facts, objective (empirical observations about the world)
o Shown: non-contingent facts, subjective (philosophical claims)
There are deep metaphysical truths, although they are strictly ineffable and can only be shown, indeed felt.
The meaning of life, the primary subject of ethics, is radically transcendent and cannot be expressed.
It follows that there are no philosophical propositions, no philosophical claims that can be expressed. All deep truths can only be shown.
Philosophical Investigations: Late Wittgenstein (1953)
Three main areas are covered in the book: philosophy of language (meaning, understanding, following a rule, etc.), philosophy of mind (thinking, remembering, imagining, intending, etc.) and the already mentioned nature of philosophy
Takeaway:
• The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. To put it in the extreme: there can be no thought without language.
• All philosophical problems arise through a misunderstanding of our language.
• Philosophy is done for the purpose of preventing us from philosophical confusion by clarifying our language. This is no trivial task and in practical terms, its impossible.
Notes on Philosophical Investigations:
• Unsystematic
o Since there is no fundamental kind of word and sentence, it is misleading to speak of the essence of language. The answer to the question ‘What is language?’ dissolves into an open-ended list of descriptions of various language-games.
o ‘Learning in philosophy is really recollecting. We remember that we really did use words that way.’ This type of recollecting will be contingent on the words used in a specific language and the social cues attached to it.
• The main point that remained unchanged was his continuing belief that philosophy is not a science about the world, but consists in the a priori clarification of language.
• Kant: denial that pure reason is capable of answering the great metaphysical questions (about the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, the freedom of the will).
o Wittgenstein is more radical than Kant, since he does not believe that our cognitive powers are too restricted to answer metaphysical questions, but that these very questions do not even make sense.
Philosophy of Language Changes from Tractatus
• We uncover or ‘show’ the metaphysical essence of the world, but only understand how our language works by giving what Wittgenstein calls a ‘perspicuous representation of its grammar’.
• Geography vs geology analogy. This ground level consists of our language and the concepts expressed by it, including philosophically problematic ones like ‘proposition’, ‘meaning’, ‘knowledge’, ‘ability’, ‘intention’, ‘number’, etc. These basic notions constitute our conceptual framework, the grid through which we obtain knowledge about the world in both life and science.
o The superficial level (geography) is all that matters.
o The deeper layers (geology) are not important. Stark opposition to Tractatus which argues in favor of logical atomism and structural analysis of prepositions.
• ‘Our language can be seen as an ancient city: a maze of little streets and squares, of old and new houses, and of houses with additions from various periods; and this surrounded by a multitude of new boroughs with straight regular streets and uniform houses’
o Surveying our language in this way is not a self-contained endeavour. Rather, we do it in order to solve philosophical problems and puzzles.
Evolution from Tractatus
• According to Tractatus, the essence of language is to depict and describe reality. More precisely, this conception can be broken down into three main theses.
o First, the essential role of words is to name objects; the meaning of a word is the object it stands for.
Words do not fulfil only the function of naming or referring to objects. Their meaning is their use, roughly speaking (PI §43), and they can very well have a use without referring to anything.
o Second, language gets connected to the world via fundamental acts of naming; we point ostensibly at an object and give the word ‘A’ a meaning by saying ‘This is A’.
The act of naming is, although important, not fundamental. Indeed, it already presupposes mastery of a language.
o Third, the essential function of propositions is to describe how things are.
Wittgenstein points out that the traditional conception of language dogmatically assumes that a certain type of propositions, which has some predominance in science, that is, the declarative subject-predicate-sentence (like ‘Pluto is a planet’), represents the form of all sentences. But really, it is only one kind of proposition among many others, not the most fundamental one. For language does not have one function, but countless many.
• Since there is no fundamental kind of word and sentence, it is misleading to speak of the essence of language. The answer to the question ‘What is language?’ dissolves into an open-ended list of descriptions of various language-games. These language-games are more or less connected to each other, without having one unique feature in common.
• ‘Game’ is what Wittgenstein famously called a family resemblance concept, and its meaning cannot be captured by a definition. Equally, ‘language’ is a family resemblance concept. Both concepts lack sharp boundaries.
• Private language: These inner states seem to be so private and unique that only I know what I am feeling. Others can only speculate. I myself may be mistaken about all my perceptions about the external world, but I am infallible as far as my inner world is concerned.
o Given this privacy, I could even invent my own private language referring to my inner states which nobody else in the world could understand. Indeed, our ordinary language seems to be a kind of private language. For given the conception of language discussed above (i.e., the idea that a word has a meaning only insofar as it stands for some entity), one could argue that words have a meaning because of their link to internal mental states, emotions, pictures, ideas, etc.
o Humpty Dumpty puts it in Alice in Wonderland in a more straightforward manner: ‘When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.
• Thinking analogy
o A related topic discussed by Wittgenstein is the concept of thinking. Again, it comes very naturally to us to conceive of thinking as a process happening inside our minds or brains, just as electronic processes are happening inside, let us say, a computer. This process inside us is supposed to be independent of any actual language we speak, for example, English or Swahili, and when we actually speak, we translate our inner thoughts into the public medium of language.
o As Thomas Hobbes put it in his Leviathan (1651): ‘the general use of speech is to transfer our mental discourse into verbal, or the train of thoughts into a train of words’.
Summary: Philosophical Investigations
• Language is not just the clothing of thought, as Frege and the young Wittgenstein believed, but actually a presupposition for being able to have the articulate thoughts that we humans can have. The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. To put it in the extreme: there can be no thought without language.
• Philosophy is done for the purpose of preventing us from philosophical confusion by clarifying our language. This clarification, however, is not trivial in any way, but belongs to the most difficult intellectual activities. Philosophy unravels the thoughts in our thinking; hence its result must be simple, but its activity as complicated as the knots it unravels.
o You ask why grammatical problems are so tough and seemingly ineradicable. Because they are connected with the oldest thought habits, i.e. with the oldest images that are engraved into our language itself … Human beings are deeply embedded in philosophical, i.e. grammatical, confusions. And freeing them from these presupposes extricating them from the immensely diverse associations they are caught up in. One must, as it were, regroup their entire language … An entire mythology is laid down in our language.
Language is not just the clothing of thought but it’s actually a presupposition for being able to have the articulate thoughts that we humans can have. The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. Or in other words, there could be no thought without language.
This is a bold proposition to say the least but one of tremendous philosophical insight. I stumbled upon Wittgenstein while reviewing Bertrand Russell’s philosophy and I was absolutely captivated with W’s theories on the philosophy of language. His conception of philosophy as a non-scientific linguistic activity is remarkable to say the least. I haven’t been able to stop thinking about his ideas for the last couple of days. The theoretical and philosophical implications of his findings have created ripples throughout time, affecting the core disciplines of theoretical philosophy (philosophy of logic, language and mind).
This is a long review because I’m including my notes on Wittgenstein’s life and philosophy, which are primarily extracted from this book. I do this in order to shed some light on the brilliance of W’s ideas (an introduction). What I find most fascinating about Wittgenstein in relation to other philosophers is how his philosophy evolved over time. I provide an example from his two main works to illustrate this point:
The Tractatus has an aesthetic beauty to it uncommon of most philosophical works. Its aphorisms are thought inducing and its structure is visually stunning and ideal for the content of the book (highly systematic and logical arguments). The writing is concise yet powerful and the implications of its findings were groundbreaking for formal logic. I have encountered few philosophical works like this one. It almost seems like it’s a work of symmetric art, rather than philosophy: ordered statements, logical inferences, rigid structure and simple takeaways (with complex underpinnings).
Philosophical Investigations builds on the ideas Tractatus and directly discredits some. Tractatus sets up the framework for which we can think about the ideas developed in Investigations. W’s style here is diametrically opposed to Tractatus: it covers a great deal of subjects with little regard for aphorisms and style, yet his observations are brilliant in and of themselves (language-games!). In contrast to Tractutus, Investigations is unsystematic in both style and content: its unstructured, it deals with a different number of topics, expands on its various arguments, yet still offers fairly simple takeaways (with just a complex underpinnings as Tractatus). More importantly, the findings from Investigations is what I believe most accurately reflects W’s legacy and school of thought. You can read more about these theories in my notes.
When I think about Wittgenstein’s philosophy,. it’s almost as you track the the evolution of his work: the growth of a systematic seeking youth into a seasoned traveler who has learned the reality of the unsystematic nature of life. For this reason, I find the philosophy of Investigations more philosophically groundbreaking, as I personally believe it more adequately describes the nature of the philosophy of language. I highly recommend Kanterian’s biography as an excellent introduction to his life and theories.
Tractatus: Early Wittgenstein (1921)
Tractatus offers an account of the essence of language (logic), the world (ontology) and their relation (intentionality). It also attempts to clarify the status of mathematics and scientific theories, reconciles solipsism with realism, denounces skepticism, and determines the nature of aesthetics, ethics and mysticism.
Early Wittgenstein argued that philosophy is the totality of all propositions that are taken as unprovable and basic in science.
Takeaway:
• Philosophy is the analysis of language, not the world.
• All philosophy is a critique of language.
Notes on Tractatus:
• Systematic: universal theory of language, applies to all languages.
• We can understand the real structure of our language only through logical analysis.
• The main function of language is to describe the world, and propositions are the smallest units of communication.
o Propositions must be able to be false. Pseudo propositions don’t fulfill this rule.
• His theory of proposition consists of two aspects.
o The first aspect can be summarized by the label ‘logical atomism’. Every atomic object has a metaphysical essence. What is it? It is the totality of all facts in which it can occur.
To find out the real structure of our propositions we must employ logical analysis. All languages have the same deep structure, which we can uncover by formal logic. This is an idea that became very dominant not only in analytic philosophy but also in linguistics, for example, via Noam Chomsky’s theories of generative grammar after the Second World War.
o The second aspect of his theory can be summarized by the label ‘picture theory of proposition’. Propositions are pictures. Every proposition is a description of a possible fact. Giving an account of what a proposition is, what makes it meaningful and how it manages to describe a fact, is of pivotal importance for understanding how any discourse about the world, and in particular scientific discourse, is possible.
Traffic court toy car example: The elements of a picture stand for the objects they depict, and the way the elements are ordered in the picture mirrors the depicted fact. Similarly, the elements of a proposition, the words, stand for the objects they depict.
• Metaphysical propositions
o A proposition that tries to depict some non-contingent fact, for example a ‘metaphysical fact’, which could not be otherwise, is simply meaningless
• Distinction between what can be said, that is, contingent facts about the world, which are the subject matter of science, and what cannot be said, but shows itself – the metaphysical essence of language and the world.
o Said: contingent facts, objective (empirical observations about the world)
o Shown: non-contingent facts, subjective (philosophical claims)
There are deep metaphysical truths, although they are strictly ineffable and can only be shown, indeed felt.
The meaning of life, the primary subject of ethics, is radically transcendent and cannot be expressed.
It follows that there are no philosophical propositions, no philosophical claims that can be expressed. All deep truths can only be shown.
Philosophical Investigations: Late Wittgenstein (1953)
Three main areas are covered in the book: philosophy of language (meaning, understanding, following a rule, etc.), philosophy of mind (thinking, remembering, imagining, intending, etc.) and the already mentioned nature of philosophy
Takeaway:
• The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. To put it in the extreme: there can be no thought without language.
• All philosophical problems arise through a misunderstanding of our language.
• Philosophy is done for the purpose of preventing us from philosophical confusion by clarifying our language. This is no trivial task and in practical terms, its impossible.
Notes on Philosophical Investigations:
• Unsystematic
o Since there is no fundamental kind of word and sentence, it is misleading to speak of the essence of language. The answer to the question ‘What is language?’ dissolves into an open-ended list of descriptions of various language-games.
o ‘Learning in philosophy is really recollecting. We remember that we really did use words that way.’ This type of recollecting will be contingent on the words used in a specific language and the social cues attached to it.
• The main point that remained unchanged was his continuing belief that philosophy is not a science about the world, but consists in the a priori clarification of language.
• Kant: denial that pure reason is capable of answering the great metaphysical questions (about the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, the freedom of the will).
o Wittgenstein is more radical than Kant, since he does not believe that our cognitive powers are too restricted to answer metaphysical questions, but that these very questions do not even make sense.
Philosophy of Language Changes from Tractatus
• We uncover or ‘show’ the metaphysical essence of the world, but only understand how our language works by giving what Wittgenstein calls a ‘perspicuous representation of its grammar’.
• Geography vs geology analogy. This ground level consists of our language and the concepts expressed by it, including philosophically problematic ones like ‘proposition’, ‘meaning’, ‘knowledge’, ‘ability’, ‘intention’, ‘number’, etc. These basic notions constitute our conceptual framework, the grid through which we obtain knowledge about the world in both life and science.
o The superficial level (geography) is all that matters.
o The deeper layers (geology) are not important. Stark opposition to Tractatus which argues in favor of logical atomism and structural analysis of prepositions.
• ‘Our language can be seen as an ancient city: a maze of little streets and squares, of old and new houses, and of houses with additions from various periods; and this surrounded by a multitude of new boroughs with straight regular streets and uniform houses’
o Surveying our language in this way is not a self-contained endeavour. Rather, we do it in order to solve philosophical problems and puzzles.
Evolution from Tractatus
• According to Tractatus, the essence of language is to depict and describe reality. More precisely, this conception can be broken down into three main theses.
o First, the essential role of words is to name objects; the meaning of a word is the object it stands for.
Words do not fulfil only the function of naming or referring to objects. Their meaning is their use, roughly speaking (PI §43), and they can very well have a use without referring to anything.
o Second, language gets connected to the world via fundamental acts of naming; we point ostensibly at an object and give the word ‘A’ a meaning by saying ‘This is A’.
The act of naming is, although important, not fundamental. Indeed, it already presupposes mastery of a language.
o Third, the essential function of propositions is to describe how things are.
Wittgenstein points out that the traditional conception of language dogmatically assumes that a certain type of propositions, which has some predominance in science, that is, the declarative subject-predicate-sentence (like ‘Pluto is a planet’), represents the form of all sentences. But really, it is only one kind of proposition among many others, not the most fundamental one. For language does not have one function, but countless many.
• Since there is no fundamental kind of word and sentence, it is misleading to speak of the essence of language. The answer to the question ‘What is language?’ dissolves into an open-ended list of descriptions of various language-games. These language-games are more or less connected to each other, without having one unique feature in common.
• ‘Game’ is what Wittgenstein famously called a family resemblance concept, and its meaning cannot be captured by a definition. Equally, ‘language’ is a family resemblance concept. Both concepts lack sharp boundaries.
• Private language: These inner states seem to be so private and unique that only I know what I am feeling. Others can only speculate. I myself may be mistaken about all my perceptions about the external world, but I am infallible as far as my inner world is concerned.
o Given this privacy, I could even invent my own private language referring to my inner states which nobody else in the world could understand. Indeed, our ordinary language seems to be a kind of private language. For given the conception of language discussed above (i.e., the idea that a word has a meaning only insofar as it stands for some entity), one could argue that words have a meaning because of their link to internal mental states, emotions, pictures, ideas, etc.
o Humpty Dumpty puts it in Alice in Wonderland in a more straightforward manner: ‘When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.
• Thinking analogy
o A related topic discussed by Wittgenstein is the concept of thinking. Again, it comes very naturally to us to conceive of thinking as a process happening inside our minds or brains, just as electronic processes are happening inside, let us say, a computer. This process inside us is supposed to be independent of any actual language we speak, for example, English or Swahili, and when we actually speak, we translate our inner thoughts into the public medium of language.
o As Thomas Hobbes put it in his Leviathan (1651): ‘the general use of speech is to transfer our mental discourse into verbal, or the train of thoughts into a train of words’.
Summary: Philosophical Investigations
• Language is not just the clothing of thought, as Frege and the young Wittgenstein believed, but actually a presupposition for being able to have the articulate thoughts that we humans can have. The limits of thought are the limits of its possible expression. To put it in the extreme: there can be no thought without language.
• Philosophy is done for the purpose of preventing us from philosophical confusion by clarifying our language. This clarification, however, is not trivial in any way, but belongs to the most difficult intellectual activities. Philosophy unravels the thoughts in our thinking; hence its result must be simple, but its activity as complicated as the knots it unravels.
o You ask why grammatical problems are so tough and seemingly ineradicable. Because they are connected with the oldest thought habits, i.e. with the oldest images that are engraved into our language itself … Human beings are deeply embedded in philosophical, i.e. grammatical, confusions. And freeing them from these presupposes extricating them from the immensely diverse associations they are caught up in. One must, as it were, regroup their entire language … An entire mythology is laid down in our language.
June 16, 2019
Insofar as this book fulfilled what it set out to do, it is more than deserving of four stars. The work, in brevity, articulated the intersection of Ludwig’s thought, life, and torment. I do think from time to time Edward exacerbated his own personal incredulities with current scholarship on Wittgenstein rather than focusing on main currents in Ludwig’s biography and writings. Nonetheless, it is a book that is a sturdy stepping stone into the life and thought of one of modernity’s greatest minds.
February 14, 2023
Wittgenstein has been popping up on the periphery of my reading interests for a little while. He is a major fascination for McCarthy in his latest two novels, The Passenger and Stella Maris. This book was a great primer for getting interested in his work. It is mainly a biography, with two chapters focused on his two great works, Tractatus and Philosophical Investigations.
Wittgenstein's life is really interesting. He comes off like a very difficult, often rude person but people were also electrified by this intense, passionate genius they were witnessing. I have not read much philosophy, I don't think I am smart enough for it but Wittgenstein's goals are appealing to me. He discards most philosophy for its failure to express clarity, he is interested in how we use language and the failures of communication. I also like how he is not interested in endlessly musing over the possibilities of philosophy but instead has a clear purpose to make progress and solve the great problems. That is admirable. His life follows that classic archetype of the tortured genius and he seemed to be depressed and tormented for large parts of his life. He is very sympathetic.
The writer of this bio, Kanterian, seemed to have a strong dislike of Terry Eagleton who he brings up multiple times to say he is wrong. I don't know enough to have an opinion on the matter. Kanterian also seems hung up on Wittgenstein's homosexuality, I think he is annoyed that people put too much emphasis on it instead of focusing on his ideas. It is only 200 pages with limpid prose.
I rate this book highly because I am now inspired to take the next step and read Philosophical Investigations, it will be difficult but I feel prepared with proper context.
Wittgenstein's life is really interesting. He comes off like a very difficult, often rude person but people were also electrified by this intense, passionate genius they were witnessing. I have not read much philosophy, I don't think I am smart enough for it but Wittgenstein's goals are appealing to me. He discards most philosophy for its failure to express clarity, he is interested in how we use language and the failures of communication. I also like how he is not interested in endlessly musing over the possibilities of philosophy but instead has a clear purpose to make progress and solve the great problems. That is admirable. His life follows that classic archetype of the tortured genius and he seemed to be depressed and tormented for large parts of his life. He is very sympathetic.
The writer of this bio, Kanterian, seemed to have a strong dislike of Terry Eagleton who he brings up multiple times to say he is wrong. I don't know enough to have an opinion on the matter. Kanterian also seems hung up on Wittgenstein's homosexuality, I think he is annoyed that people put too much emphasis on it instead of focusing on his ideas. It is only 200 pages with limpid prose.
I rate this book highly because I am now inspired to take the next step and read Philosophical Investigations, it will be difficult but I feel prepared with proper context.
March 22, 2020
Какая-то непонятная книжка. Последовательность фактов, которая не складывается ни в картину частной жизни, ни в жизнь философа. Даром что короткая и прочитал я её за бесплатно.
В чем "критичность" биографии я тоже не понял. В том, как автор называет всех остальных дураками? Ну ладно, но наезд на "Кочергу" весьма сомнительный, ибо вот она как раз способна дать сносное представление о Витгенштейне. Автор жалуется, де из его героя сделали индустрию всякие сторонние люди. Кхм, а эта книжка никак не продукт той же самой индустрии? Даром, что ссылки на Рэя Монка и его книгу даются через страницу.
Почему про Вейнингера есть справка с очерком идей "Пола и характера", а про взгляды Рассела и Мура ни слова? Просто два каких-то дурака, которые ничего не понимали. Про Фреге вроде бы что-то есть, а на деле ничего.
К русскому изданию тоже есть вопрос: почему цитаты из "Логико-философского трактата" в переводе Руднева? Этот перевод не обругала, кажется, только моя мама.
И почему, сука, почему Михаил Бахтин упоминается как "философ-марксист". Неужели Иглтон сморозил такую фигню?
В чем "критичность" биографии я тоже не понял. В том, как автор называет всех остальных дураками? Ну ладно, но наезд на "Кочергу" весьма сомнительный, ибо вот она как раз способна дать сносное представление о Витгенштейне. Автор жалуется, де из его героя сделали индустрию всякие сторонние люди. Кхм, а эта книжка никак не продукт той же самой индустрии? Даром, что ссылки на Рэя Монка и его книгу даются через страницу.
Почему про Вейнингера есть справка с очерком идей "Пола и характера", а про взгляды Рассела и Мура ни слова? Просто два каких-то дурака, которые ничего не понимали. Про Фреге вроде бы что-то есть, а на деле ничего.
К русскому изданию тоже есть вопрос: почему цитаты из "Логико-философского трактата" в переводе Руднева? Этот перевод не обругала, кажется, только моя мама.
И почему, сука, почему Михаил Бахтин упоминается как "философ-марксист". Неужели Иглтон сморозил такую фигню?
January 26, 2018
Биографию Витгенштейна читать безумно интересно и полезно именно потому, что он не проводил черту между своей жизнью и работой. И хотя он, его личность и мысли претерпевали множество изменений, они всегда отражались в его философии, и наоборот. Говорить, что биография мыслителя не имеет никакого отношения к его труду, еще можно, так как все философские работы имеют достаточную самоценность и самостоятельность, чтобы быть воспринятыми вне контекста жизни их авторов. Тем не менее, нельзя отбрасывать человека, стоящего за фундаментальными трудами, в свое время совершившими переворот и революцию господствующей мысли.
June 24, 2019
Excellent Short Treatment of Wittgenstein
This book often references one of the definitive works on Wittgenstein, Ray Monk’s biography of him. In many ways this book is more useful than that excellent book.
The main advantage of this book is that it provides much better, much clearer explanations of Wittgenstein’s actual work. While this book provides a reasonably detailed biography, it’s real strength in is its explanations of his work and influence.
The book’s brevity allows it to focus on a very enigmatic figure and give a sense of clarity to him.
This book often references one of the definitive works on Wittgenstein, Ray Monk’s biography of him. In many ways this book is more useful than that excellent book.
The main advantage of this book is that it provides much better, much clearer explanations of Wittgenstein’s actual work. While this book provides a reasonably detailed biography, it’s real strength in is its explanations of his work and influence.
The book’s brevity allows it to focus on a very enigmatic figure and give a sense of clarity to him.
March 12, 2022
Tanımadığım bir filozofu, hayatını öğrenmeye başlayarak tanımak güzeldi. Daha objektif yaklaşmayı sağladı. Kitabın özelinde de hayatını salt bi gerçeklikle vermek yerine düşüncelerini ve olayları harmanlayarak vermesi benim ilgimi daha da artırdı. Felsefe bilmektense felsefeyi ortaya çıkaran etmenleri merak ettiğimi farkettim. Türkçe çevirisi Kadir Danış tarafından yapılmış ben çok beğendim.
December 4, 2023
"My day passes between logic, whistling, going for walks, and being depressed. I wish to God that I were more intelligent and everything would finally become clear to me - or else that I needn't live much longer."
June 30, 2019
"Linguistic analysis ... make room for metaphysics, ethics, aesthetics, God, in short for all that which Wittgenstein subsumes under the label ‘the Higher’. " p.84
December 28, 2019
A concise introduction to Wittgenstein's life and philosophy. Excellent for both academics and non-academics.
January 4, 2020
Очень уж краткая био, лишь чуть длинее статьи в вики. И слишком, на мой взгляд, перегружена этой самой философией. Как-будто автор хотел всем сказать, что он прям шарит сильно в текстах Людвига и готов с легкостью всем это показать. Само издание отличное.
August 22, 2020
Insightful introduction to W, his philosophy, and the linguistic turn as a whole
November 27, 2021
Наконец всё стало понятно про гений Витгенштейна и его влияние на поп-культуру
July 23, 2025
Excellent biography of Wittgenstein’s life. Well written and very well researched.
December 11, 2024
The book is great, providing a comprehensive understanding of Wittgenstein's life and philosophy. It’s the best Wittgenstein biography I’ve read so far.
That said, there is one aspect that bothered me. Among the many contradictory or controversial views Wittgenstein held throughout his life, the author, Mr. Kanterian, chose to challenge only his sympathy for the Bolsheviks. For example, Wittgenstein's self-loathing—including his occasional expressions of homophobia and antisemitism—is often presented with a degree of sympathy or at least looked at as an understandable flaw. However, when discussing Wittgenstein's support for the socialist cause in Russia, the author feels compelled to intervene and critique his world view, tell us about all the horrifying things that were going on in the Soviet Union at the time (the author, apparently feels that he has to inform one of the greatest thinkers ever, who had already been there).
Anyway, it is a nice book to read. I would recommend it. I would also recommend the author to stop trying to win "good-western-liberal points" during a biography.
That said, there is one aspect that bothered me. Among the many contradictory or controversial views Wittgenstein held throughout his life, the author, Mr. Kanterian, chose to challenge only his sympathy for the Bolsheviks. For example, Wittgenstein's self-loathing—including his occasional expressions of homophobia and antisemitism—is often presented with a degree of sympathy or at least looked at as an understandable flaw. However, when discussing Wittgenstein's support for the socialist cause in Russia, the author feels compelled to intervene and critique his world view, tell us about all the horrifying things that were going on in the Soviet Union at the time (the author, apparently feels that he has to inform one of the greatest thinkers ever, who had already been there).
Anyway, it is a nice book to read. I would recommend it. I would also recommend the author to stop trying to win "good-western-liberal points" during a biography.
February 8, 2009
A good synthesis of his life and philosophy done without sensationalizing.
March 12, 2019
Step-stone на пути к фолианту имени Рэя Монка.
March 31, 2017
Отмечу прежде всего само русское издание: оно идеально для любителя книг. Приятное на ощупь, удобно держать в руках, соблюдены почти все принципы типографики, эстетическое форматирование текста. Теперь о самой книге: написана с большой любовью, первые три четверти читал с большим интересом. По какой-то причине, в которой я не разобрался, последняя четверть книги понравилась намного меньше. Хотя и говорится об эволюции взглядов Витгенштейна, текст совершенно не заинтересовал его финальными упражнениями, тогда как ранние шаги, наоборот, очень тронули.
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews