What do you think?
Rate this book
Introducing Graphic Guides
introducing-wittgenstein
This is a superlative graphic guide described as 'warm, witty and wise' by Jonathan Ree to an enigmatic master of twentieth-century philosophy.
176 pages, Paperback
First published July 22, 1992
204 people are currently reading
702 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 - 30 of 79 reviews
October 20, 2022
“Nothing is so difficult as not deceiving yourself.” ~Ludwig Wittgenstein
As language, according to Wittgenstein, is wholly inadequate in the conveyance of thought, I have endeavored to put my review firmly in order by being silent about it.
As language, according to Wittgenstein, is wholly inadequate in the conveyance of thought, I have endeavored to put my review firmly in order by being silent about it.
April 26, 2018
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Wittgenstein’s only book, and less than one hundred pages, is some difficult read for this reviewer.
Even though I was a virgin in the graphic book department until this week, I needed a simplified version to understand this guy.
So, I guess I cheated.
Anyway, I now understand a little bit about his thoughts, probably as much as Ludwig himself understood them.
He is dead now. I seem to be alive. All the erudition that he received from others and I received from him, is sitting quietly in a corner of my cranium temporarily, just waiting to leak out into nothingness.
Anyway, interesting life, interesting character, interesting theories.
However, if tomorrow someone presented me with a choice, a conversation about this Austrian or a coffee almond fudge ice cream cone, I would go with the dessert.
Even though I was a virgin in the graphic book department until this week, I needed a simplified version to understand this guy.
So, I guess I cheated.
Anyway, I now understand a little bit about his thoughts, probably as much as Ludwig himself understood them.
He is dead now. I seem to be alive. All the erudition that he received from others and I received from him, is sitting quietly in a corner of my cranium temporarily, just waiting to leak out into nothingness.
Anyway, interesting life, interesting character, interesting theories.
However, if tomorrow someone presented me with a choice, a conversation about this Austrian or a coffee almond fudge ice cream cone, I would go with the dessert.
October 10, 2025
Great introduction to Wittgenstein. Read it before you try to read him. One of the hardest philosophers I have ever read! This book will give you a broad overview of his unique perspective on logic; but be warned, you will come away with many questions that you will still need to answer about his thought process!
May 30, 2024
Pois então, faz muito mais sentido Wittgenstein em quadrinhos ou no cinema, mais que ser lido ou ouvido, Wittgenstein deve ser visto.
July 19, 2016
For those of you who don’t know, the “Introducing” series published by Toten Books is a graphic novel presentation of big ideas and their thinkers. They are fun to read and a huge help for visual learners. It’s true there isn’t as much information as could fit onto a fully-worded page, but it makes up in mnemonic assistance what it lacks in exhaustive content. Also, because there isn’t as much emphasis placed on written content as pictorial interpretation, the effort to highlight central concepts is predominant. It almost felt in parts that this was Wittgensteinian philosophy in outline form, which definitely has its perks. Though, I won’t lie, it did at times teeter on the edge of skimming ideas that really require much more explanation, for the most part it provided an adequate amount. The worst part of it all is that some of the illustrations were entirely gratuitous, obviously designed to fill up space, and had very little to do with the topic; but even then they help you to remember what you learned on that page even if by their utter pointlessness. Which brings me back to my point that this book is extremely helpful as a memory tool for primary principles, and since I read it in conjunction with excerpts from Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and Philosophical Investigations (which I highly recommend), it served as a very enjoyable reinforcement for my understanding.
Wittgenstein was a genius, no doubt. This guy was raised in one of the wealthiest families in Vienna. He was seriously rich. His family had popular composers and artists over to the house all the time. After the war, the family increased in wealth as a result of smart stock investments in the U.S. But none of that is interesting in and of itself; what is interesting is that none of this determined Ludwig as a sybarite and dandy. When WWI broke out, he volunteered to fight on the frone lines, and even then, when first seeing the enemy on the battlefield, he wrote, “Now I have a chance to be a decent human being, for I am standing eye to eye with death.” When he was finally taken as a prisoner of war, he refused to accept his release until the men under his command were released with him. He even requested to be transferred from his camp to another to assist his countrymen who had contracted typhoid. Now here’s a man who, when he has something to say, makes one listen.
Wittgenstein began his education and career path as an engineer, with a penchant for mathematics. His love of solving problems led him ultimately into philosophy. Many big philosophers back in the day were wealthy aristocrats, as large fortunes and prestige bring with them ample opportunities for educational advancement, recognition, and easy publication of their ideas. Bertrand Russell, Wittgenstein’s mentor, was a very good example of this. But although Wittgenstein was probably one of the more wealthy philosophers in the pool of contenders across the ages, he determined not to think from the comfort of his couch. His Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Latin for "Logical-Philosophical Treatise"), his first opus for which he was awarded a doctorate, was written while he was fighting on the front lines! His later work, Philosophical Investigations, was published posthumously from his lectures, and is quintessentially the heroic Wittgenstein to its core in that it unsparingly and unflinchingly debunked his own first work!
I have a lot of respect for this man, even though he made some really dumb mistakes. While he was teaching in a poor village in Austria, supposedly out of the goodness of his heart, he apparently caned boys and pulled girls’ hair for wrong answers. That is most definitely NOT cool, even though the word caning makes me laugh. He was described by Russell as an intense, volatile, and “domineering” genius. Russell was often seriously concerned about Wittgenstein’s mental physical health due to his obsessive compulsiveness and distress over thought-problems. Biographers of Wittgenstein’s famous disagreement with Karl Popper (see my review of Wittgenstein’s Poker at http://bookburningservice.blogspot.co...) have him wielding a hot poker at Popper for frustrating him during a routine classroom debate at the Moral Science Club, which meetings Wittgenstein was famous for crashing. But, despite losing face at the poker-debate, Wittgenstein didn’t commit suicide like his other three brothers, so… Point—Wittgenstein (Ludwig).
His non-corporeal teaching methods and views on academia were the most intriguing part of his life for me. His students described his style as discursive and spontaneous. He would wrestle with questions out-loud, and invite his students into working towards the answers with him right then and there. He wanted learning to be organic and hands-on as much as possible, which probably stemmed from his engineering background. He loathed the artifice and hubris of academic atmospheres, and believed that they often encouraged hypotheticals, tautologies, and specious reasoning which diverged widely from a real world with real problems. His style was the kind in which thought and language experiments (games) teased new solutions out of his mind and the minds of his students. He endeavored to work in concert with the brain, instead of bridling the mind’s full potential within the confines of formalities and structures designed to impress other people and build an institution’s reputation. He preferred real learning in the face of paper degrees, professorial bluster, and servile gpa-performance.
As I mentioned before, in tandem with reading Introducing Wittgenstein I also read selections from Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus and Philosophical Investigations. The difficulty of a layman comprehending these texts is evidenced in the first few sentences of Wittgenstein’s preface to the Tractatus which included the quasi-caution, “Perhaps this book will be understood only by someone who has himself already had the thoughts that are expressed in it—or at least similar thoughts…Its purpose would be achieved if it gave pleasure to one person who read and understood it”; but his obvious lack of confidence in anyone being able to perfectly accomplish that feat was demonstrated as he patted his examiners G.E. Moore and Bertrand Russell on the back the moment after they awarded him a PhD for it, saying to them, “Don’t worry, I know you’ll never understand it.”
One of the things I came across in this my second reading of the excerpts of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and Philosophical Investigations is his defense of common parlance against academic definitions. He attacks again and again the dissection of life for the sake of science. Life is best known when it is lived, and language is best studied as it is spoken and used, although there is some limited value in specification and definition.
To repeat, we can draw a boundary—for a special purpose. Does it take that to make the concept usable? Not at all! (Except for that special purpose.) No more than it took the definition: 1 pace = 75 cm. to make the measure of length ‘one pace’ usable. And if you want to say “But still, before that it wasn’t an exact measure”, then I reply: very well, it was an exact one. –Though you still owe me a definition of exactness…Is it even always an advantage to replace an indistinct picture by a sharp one? Isn’t the indistinct one often exactly what we need? (Philosophical Investigations)
However, Wittgenstein didn’t believe vagueness was always our only option, just that it was often true to the world we find ourselves in. Responding to the very real need of discovering and formulating more precise definitions at times, Wittgenstein says that there are very workable “family resemblances” between words and ideas, long before an artificial definition is set up as a warden to prevent meaning from leaking out. Consider words like ‘good’. He says that “there is no one common property which the word good refers to. But there are resemblances between the various meanings of the term—like family resemblances” (Introducing Wittgenstein). These ‘family resemblances’ are the foundation for any definition we might come up with, and it’s best we get comfortable with this notion, because it’s the way cognition operates fundamentally. “We give examples of similarities and do not attempt to define them, as there are no sharp boundaries” (IW).
It may sound profound to some, or like linguistic sacrilege to others, but really, how could anyone have missed the simple truism of everyday life that every word in every mouth means something a bit different? If twenty different people use supposedly the same word to indicate twenty slightly different things, with twenty different reasons to use it, and hundreds of unique personal experiences to help define it, which passed through thousands of different meanings from different people and their own personal experiences, then why would we think a dead dictionary or an isolated professor at his lonely desk in a quiet room would ever know enough about that word and its myriad meanings to tell a person what they meant when they used it in that one unrepeatable instant? We now see the problem Wittgenstein was highlighting, for he was always keen on turning “latent nonsense into patent nonsense.”
No doubt some good ole’ professor can arrive some original sense in our word. “[Oftentimes] the kinship [between two somewhat ‘vague’ categories like color] is just as undeniable as the difference. (PI)”, but let our esteemed lexicographers take care how they go about measuring something that’s still alive, moving, and growing.
Imagine having to sketch a sharply defined picture ‘corresponding’ to a blurred one…In such a difficulty always ask yourself: How did we learn the meaning of this word (“good” for instance)? From what sort of examples? In what language-games [unique word-play and personal communication scenarios]? Then it will be easier for you to see that the word must have a family of meanings. (PI)
The language idea basically boils down to the simple problem of thinking and ideas: thinking does not constitute reality. Our internal models of the universe are not the universe. The most complete and explicit data to be had about the universe...IS the universe. You’re welcome.
Wittgenstein, along with writers/thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre, were the anti-academic, anti-elitist voices who challenged the high thinking and low living of many of their aristocratic contemporaries. He was unwieldy, but probably in a way that kept those around him honest and, well, caught. He was the people’s man in high places, and many will never know how successfully he may have grounded the intelligentsia from a tyrannical control of ideas which belong to the instinctual rabble as much as anyone. Who knows where fascist, top-down oppression and manipulation would occur next if not for representatives of the common man acting as saboteurs and ‘inside men’ to disrupt the haughty detachment that often infects the privileged. Wittgenstein was a hero. When he wasn’t teaching in remote villages in Austria. Or wielding hot pokers at visiting lecturers.
Like this review? Clicking ‘like’ lets me know someone’s reading! For more reviews, visit my blog at www.bookburningservice.blogspot.com and start following!
Wittgenstein was a genius, no doubt. This guy was raised in one of the wealthiest families in Vienna. He was seriously rich. His family had popular composers and artists over to the house all the time. After the war, the family increased in wealth as a result of smart stock investments in the U.S. But none of that is interesting in and of itself; what is interesting is that none of this determined Ludwig as a sybarite and dandy. When WWI broke out, he volunteered to fight on the frone lines, and even then, when first seeing the enemy on the battlefield, he wrote, “Now I have a chance to be a decent human being, for I am standing eye to eye with death.” When he was finally taken as a prisoner of war, he refused to accept his release until the men under his command were released with him. He even requested to be transferred from his camp to another to assist his countrymen who had contracted typhoid. Now here’s a man who, when he has something to say, makes one listen.
Wittgenstein began his education and career path as an engineer, with a penchant for mathematics. His love of solving problems led him ultimately into philosophy. Many big philosophers back in the day were wealthy aristocrats, as large fortunes and prestige bring with them ample opportunities for educational advancement, recognition, and easy publication of their ideas. Bertrand Russell, Wittgenstein’s mentor, was a very good example of this. But although Wittgenstein was probably one of the more wealthy philosophers in the pool of contenders across the ages, he determined not to think from the comfort of his couch. His Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Latin for "Logical-Philosophical Treatise"), his first opus for which he was awarded a doctorate, was written while he was fighting on the front lines! His later work, Philosophical Investigations, was published posthumously from his lectures, and is quintessentially the heroic Wittgenstein to its core in that it unsparingly and unflinchingly debunked his own first work!
I have a lot of respect for this man, even though he made some really dumb mistakes. While he was teaching in a poor village in Austria, supposedly out of the goodness of his heart, he apparently caned boys and pulled girls’ hair for wrong answers. That is most definitely NOT cool, even though the word caning makes me laugh. He was described by Russell as an intense, volatile, and “domineering” genius. Russell was often seriously concerned about Wittgenstein’s mental physical health due to his obsessive compulsiveness and distress over thought-problems. Biographers of Wittgenstein’s famous disagreement with Karl Popper (see my review of Wittgenstein’s Poker at http://bookburningservice.blogspot.co...) have him wielding a hot poker at Popper for frustrating him during a routine classroom debate at the Moral Science Club, which meetings Wittgenstein was famous for crashing. But, despite losing face at the poker-debate, Wittgenstein didn’t commit suicide like his other three brothers, so… Point—Wittgenstein (Ludwig).
His non-corporeal teaching methods and views on academia were the most intriguing part of his life for me. His students described his style as discursive and spontaneous. He would wrestle with questions out-loud, and invite his students into working towards the answers with him right then and there. He wanted learning to be organic and hands-on as much as possible, which probably stemmed from his engineering background. He loathed the artifice and hubris of academic atmospheres, and believed that they often encouraged hypotheticals, tautologies, and specious reasoning which diverged widely from a real world with real problems. His style was the kind in which thought and language experiments (games) teased new solutions out of his mind and the minds of his students. He endeavored to work in concert with the brain, instead of bridling the mind’s full potential within the confines of formalities and structures designed to impress other people and build an institution’s reputation. He preferred real learning in the face of paper degrees, professorial bluster, and servile gpa-performance.
As I mentioned before, in tandem with reading Introducing Wittgenstein I also read selections from Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus and Philosophical Investigations. The difficulty of a layman comprehending these texts is evidenced in the first few sentences of Wittgenstein’s preface to the Tractatus which included the quasi-caution, “Perhaps this book will be understood only by someone who has himself already had the thoughts that are expressed in it—or at least similar thoughts…Its purpose would be achieved if it gave pleasure to one person who read and understood it”; but his obvious lack of confidence in anyone being able to perfectly accomplish that feat was demonstrated as he patted his examiners G.E. Moore and Bertrand Russell on the back the moment after they awarded him a PhD for it, saying to them, “Don’t worry, I know you’ll never understand it.”
One of the things I came across in this my second reading of the excerpts of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and Philosophical Investigations is his defense of common parlance against academic definitions. He attacks again and again the dissection of life for the sake of science. Life is best known when it is lived, and language is best studied as it is spoken and used, although there is some limited value in specification and definition.
To repeat, we can draw a boundary—for a special purpose. Does it take that to make the concept usable? Not at all! (Except for that special purpose.) No more than it took the definition: 1 pace = 75 cm. to make the measure of length ‘one pace’ usable. And if you want to say “But still, before that it wasn’t an exact measure”, then I reply: very well, it was an exact one. –Though you still owe me a definition of exactness…Is it even always an advantage to replace an indistinct picture by a sharp one? Isn’t the indistinct one often exactly what we need? (Philosophical Investigations)
However, Wittgenstein didn’t believe vagueness was always our only option, just that it was often true to the world we find ourselves in. Responding to the very real need of discovering and formulating more precise definitions at times, Wittgenstein says that there are very workable “family resemblances” between words and ideas, long before an artificial definition is set up as a warden to prevent meaning from leaking out. Consider words like ‘good’. He says that “there is no one common property which the word good refers to. But there are resemblances between the various meanings of the term—like family resemblances” (Introducing Wittgenstein). These ‘family resemblances’ are the foundation for any definition we might come up with, and it’s best we get comfortable with this notion, because it’s the way cognition operates fundamentally. “We give examples of similarities and do not attempt to define them, as there are no sharp boundaries” (IW).
It may sound profound to some, or like linguistic sacrilege to others, but really, how could anyone have missed the simple truism of everyday life that every word in every mouth means something a bit different? If twenty different people use supposedly the same word to indicate twenty slightly different things, with twenty different reasons to use it, and hundreds of unique personal experiences to help define it, which passed through thousands of different meanings from different people and their own personal experiences, then why would we think a dead dictionary or an isolated professor at his lonely desk in a quiet room would ever know enough about that word and its myriad meanings to tell a person what they meant when they used it in that one unrepeatable instant? We now see the problem Wittgenstein was highlighting, for he was always keen on turning “latent nonsense into patent nonsense.”
No doubt some good ole’ professor can arrive some original sense in our word. “[Oftentimes] the kinship [between two somewhat ‘vague’ categories like color] is just as undeniable as the difference. (PI)”, but let our esteemed lexicographers take care how they go about measuring something that’s still alive, moving, and growing.
Imagine having to sketch a sharply defined picture ‘corresponding’ to a blurred one…In such a difficulty always ask yourself: How did we learn the meaning of this word (“good” for instance)? From what sort of examples? In what language-games [unique word-play and personal communication scenarios]? Then it will be easier for you to see that the word must have a family of meanings. (PI)
The language idea basically boils down to the simple problem of thinking and ideas: thinking does not constitute reality. Our internal models of the universe are not the universe. The most complete and explicit data to be had about the universe...IS the universe. You’re welcome.
Wittgenstein, along with writers/thinkers like Jean-Paul Sartre, were the anti-academic, anti-elitist voices who challenged the high thinking and low living of many of their aristocratic contemporaries. He was unwieldy, but probably in a way that kept those around him honest and, well, caught. He was the people’s man in high places, and many will never know how successfully he may have grounded the intelligentsia from a tyrannical control of ideas which belong to the instinctual rabble as much as anyone. Who knows where fascist, top-down oppression and manipulation would occur next if not for representatives of the common man acting as saboteurs and ‘inside men’ to disrupt the haughty detachment that often infects the privileged. Wittgenstein was a hero. When he wasn’t teaching in remote villages in Austria. Or wielding hot pokers at visiting lecturers.
Like this review? Clicking ‘like’ lets me know someone’s reading! For more reviews, visit my blog at www.bookburningservice.blogspot.com and start following!
January 4, 2016
An example of a logical picture would be, "There is a lion in the room." But that could be true or false. We can check the room and see that it is false. One problem I have is with Wittgenstein's personal belief system. What if I said, "There is an angel in the room" or "God is in the room." Would Wittgenstein call those statements true? Possibly. Kind of defeats the purpose of what he is saying. I mean, if an angel that we do not see can be in the room, why not a lion?
Solipsism is the belief that nothing exists beyond the self. Feels that way, doesn't it? Bertrand Russell speaks of a woman who told him, "I'm a solipsist, but why aren't there more of them?" Actually, there is no "I". It's a mirage.
On Ethics: "And so it is impossible for there to be propositions of ethics. Propositions can express nothing higher."--Tractatus 6.42. "It is clear that ethics cannot be put into words. Ethics is transcendental."--Tractatus 6.421.
A Swiss girl named Marguerite visited Ludwig in Norway. She stayed with him for two weeks. Wittgenstein spent most of that time praying and meditating. He left her alone, and she left him.
Moritz Schlick, the leader of the Vienna Circle, would later be assassinated by a Nazi student.
Francis Skinner, a young undergraduate was a lover to Ludwig. He died in 1941. Then Ludwig fell in love with Ben Richards in 1946.
Ludwig worked on philosophy until his death in 1951.
When someone asked why the League of Nations had failed: "Tell him to find out first why wolves eat lambs."
On being told someone gave up on his doctorate because he had nothing original to say: "For that action alone they should give him his PhD."
When someone talked about progress and would rather live now than like the caveman did: "Yes, of course you would. But would the caveman?"
"I should not like my writing to spare other people the trouble of thinking. But, if possible, to stimulate someone to thoughts of his own."
"Our way of life is mirrored in language."
"I'd like to use as a motto, 'I'll teach you differences', from Shakespeare's King Lear."
When he speaks of language, it reminds me of teaching English as a second language in Vietnam. I would start with sentences like, "This is a chair" and "That is a chair." We work from there.
Solipsism is the belief that nothing exists beyond the self. Feels that way, doesn't it? Bertrand Russell speaks of a woman who told him, "I'm a solipsist, but why aren't there more of them?" Actually, there is no "I". It's a mirage.
On Ethics: "And so it is impossible for there to be propositions of ethics. Propositions can express nothing higher."--Tractatus 6.42. "It is clear that ethics cannot be put into words. Ethics is transcendental."--Tractatus 6.421.
A Swiss girl named Marguerite visited Ludwig in Norway. She stayed with him for two weeks. Wittgenstein spent most of that time praying and meditating. He left her alone, and she left him.
Moritz Schlick, the leader of the Vienna Circle, would later be assassinated by a Nazi student.
Francis Skinner, a young undergraduate was a lover to Ludwig. He died in 1941. Then Ludwig fell in love with Ben Richards in 1946.
Ludwig worked on philosophy until his death in 1951.
When someone asked why the League of Nations had failed: "Tell him to find out first why wolves eat lambs."
On being told someone gave up on his doctorate because he had nothing original to say: "For that action alone they should give him his PhD."
When someone talked about progress and would rather live now than like the caveman did: "Yes, of course you would. But would the caveman?"
"I should not like my writing to spare other people the trouble of thinking. But, if possible, to stimulate someone to thoughts of his own."
"Our way of life is mirrored in language."
"I'd like to use as a motto, 'I'll teach you differences', from Shakespeare's King Lear."
When he speaks of language, it reminds me of teaching English as a second language in Vietnam. I would start with sentences like, "This is a chair" and "That is a chair." We work from there.
July 11, 2013
Immediate response: It helped. This seems to be a good starting point on Wittgenstein.
A short review, from July 10:
As part of my weird quest-to-reread-Infinite-Jest, I decided I needed to read certain key influences on David Foster Wallace, including Wittgenstein's Tractatus...or did I? And anyway, where to start on such a book? So, I started here. The illustrations are random and vaguely pointless, but text is nice and simple. It highlights how absolutely fascinating Wittgenstein the person was. I finished quite a bit confused on Tractatus, but felt something of a comprehension of Wittgenstein's main later work, [Philosophical Investigations] (published posthumously). The overall effect of this book was to get me started on and interested in Wittgenstein. That's a success.
A short review, from July 10:
As part of my weird quest-to-reread-Infinite-Jest, I decided I needed to read certain key influences on David Foster Wallace, including Wittgenstein's Tractatus...or did I? And anyway, where to start on such a book? So, I started here. The illustrations are random and vaguely pointless, but text is nice and simple. It highlights how absolutely fascinating Wittgenstein the person was. I finished quite a bit confused on Tractatus, but felt something of a comprehension of Wittgenstein's main later work, [Philosophical Investigations] (published posthumously). The overall effect of this book was to get me started on and interested in Wittgenstein. That's a success.
September 10, 2019
الفلسفة هي محاولة فك افتتان العقل من سحر اللغة التي نمت داخلنا من خلال عمليات انعكاس تصورات و افكار المجتمع داخل قالب نحوي
المجنون فيتجنشتاين
المجنون فيتجنشتاين
June 4, 2013
I've been reading a few books from the 'Introducing ... A Graphics Guide' series the past several weeks. They've been surprisingly good, and this one is no exception. Over the years I've read quite a bit of Wittgenstein (Foundations of Mathematics, Philosophical Investigations, On Certainty, and the Blue and Brown books), but knew next to nothing of Wittgenstein's life and (ironically) next to nothing of his personal view of life. This little book filled in those gaps.
Wittgenstein is a deceptively difficult philosopher. When you read Philosophical Investigations, for example, you're faced with a lot of aphorisms and seemingly simple questions. You have an idea that he's aiming at something, and that you might be expected to 'get' it, but the main point always seems just out of reach. Or at least that was so for me - your mileage may vary. But one thing that comes across in everything I've read by Wittgenstein makes one thing very clear: he had an extraordinary ability to identify mental laziness and habits of thought that lead us to make unwarranted assumptions.
This book helps show some of the things that Wittgenstein was getting at. And it includes a brief bibliography at the end if you want more detail (including a reference to a 4 volume 2000 page analysis of Philosophical Investigations!).
Wittgenstein is a deceptively difficult philosopher. When you read Philosophical Investigations, for example, you're faced with a lot of aphorisms and seemingly simple questions. You have an idea that he's aiming at something, and that you might be expected to 'get' it, but the main point always seems just out of reach. Or at least that was so for me - your mileage may vary. But one thing that comes across in everything I've read by Wittgenstein makes one thing very clear: he had an extraordinary ability to identify mental laziness and habits of thought that lead us to make unwarranted assumptions.
This book helps show some of the things that Wittgenstein was getting at. And it includes a brief bibliography at the end if you want more detail (including a reference to a 4 volume 2000 page analysis of Philosophical Investigations!).
January 22, 2023
'Don't worry, I know you'll never understand it.'
September 15, 2021
Due stelle e mezza
December 8, 2020
Not sure I understood the philosophy and how is it different from semiotics, but it’s a very good introduction which I enjoyed and it kept me curious about Wittgenstein’s work.
Read
July 29, 2016i’ve realized that one of my favorite things about the philosophy classes i took at carleton was hashing it out in class with the other students. somehow, reading a condensed version of philosophy like this, without the knowledge that i’m going to take some kernel of understanding with me into a classroom, the words just don’t resonate the same way. plus, the average person you talk to will treat you like a joker if you engage in the kinds of philosophical ramblings that wittgenstein will induce. still, it reminds me of my first classes on epistemology, thinking about thinking, in a good way.
March 7, 2018
I found this (strangely enough) comic book on W. witty, surprisingly reveiling and rich in thoughts. There are not that many detailed explanations, but still it got pretty deep in pointing at basics of his concepts and it serves as a nice overview on the whole body of his work. The book also shows many peculiar details, nice pun-like points and life events in connection to his philosophy. It encourages you to dig deeper and explore the rich and mesmerising thought of the genius of Ludwig Wittgenstein.
December 24, 2010
Hmm, it was a comic book so I thought it was going to make things simpler but I still didn't really get a lot of the ideas, plus the drawings weren't that great. I might have been better off actually trying to read the Tractatus. There was a part in the middle about thinking that I got a little interested in, but overall I wasn't feeling it.
July 14, 2017
Such a fun way to introduce a philosopher. Heaton uses a lot of pictures, examples, just plain text to go through and explain central themes to Wittgenstein. Albeit not comprehensive, it is an introduction and it an awesome primer for his work.
April 29, 2019
My fav quotes (not a review):
-Page 4 |
"At the age of fourteen, he was sent to a rather unacademic school at Linz. Adolf Hitler, who was almost exactly the same age as Ludwig, was also there."
-Page 4 |
"All our children seem very gifted – except for poor, dull Ludwig! I’m not sending my children to schools where they will pick up the Austrian establishment’s bad habits of mind! At the age of 10, I constructed a working model of a sewing–machine out of bits of wood and wire."
-Page 8 |
"He read Leo Tolstoy’s The Gospel in Brief and was deeply influenced by it."
-Page 13 |
"Remember – we just SPEAK to children, and they learn. We don’t have to explain what language is first."
-Page 17 |
"“I see a cherry tree” but can we see the “I” that sees the cherry tree? I look in a mirror. I can see my eyes but can I see the “I” that sees them?"
-Page 19 |
"It is clear that ethics cannot be put into words. Ethics is transcendental"
-Page 19 |
"He distinguished between the relative and the ethical use of “good”."
-Page 20 |
"No amount of reading can do this for us. So the first sentence of the preface to the Tractatus reads: “Perhaps this book will be understood only by someone who has himself already had the thoughts expressed in it — or at least similar thoughts.”"
-Page 21 |
"He was a born teacher, although an unorthodox one. He did not lecture but led the children on by means of questions. He had them inventing a steam engine, learning anatomy by assembling the skeleton of a cat, astronomy by observing the night sky and so on. He put great emphasis on mathematics and taught it to a higher level than was expected of the age group."
-Page 28 |
"For him, everything depended on the spirit in which something is done. This was true for his way of teaching, attitude to cooking and attitude to friends."
-Page 28 |
"Knowledge was intimately connected with doing. ▶ He could design a house, make a sculpture, or conduct an orchestra. ▶ He was an engineer by training and was never at loggerheads with machines. ▶ Music was central to his life."
-Page 38 |
"But can we think a thought internally without language and then report it? If this were so, it would imply there are two processes — language and thoughts. But can you isolate thought from language when you speak thoughtfully? Can we inwardly see our thoughts, as we can feel a pain without groaning?"
-Page 39 |
"It is not like taking a video of a train going by in a flash, and then slowing the video down to see what the train looked like. Thoughts do not go by in parts like the carriages of a train. We think them. We can have half a train but not half a thought — but we may be half way through expressing a thought or may not have worked out all its implications."
-Page 41 |
"We then puzzle over the link between the two: the expressions of our language and the reality with which it deals."
-Page 44 |
"If someone is love-sick, a scientific explanation will not bring him peace, but the right gesture might help."
-Page 49 |
"Does he really love me, or is he only pretending? Do I really love her, or am I kidding myself?"
-Page 53 |
"Wittgenstein’s therapy is concerned not so much with knowledge as with clarifying the language games weaving the inner to the outer."
-Page 56 |
"Understanding language is like understanding music."
-Page 60 |
"Wittgenstein was particularly fond of Leo Tolstoy’s short story, “The Three Hermits”, from Twenty-three Tales (1886). It illustrated for him the depth and seriousness of philosophical problems."
-Page 4 |
"At the age of fourteen, he was sent to a rather unacademic school at Linz. Adolf Hitler, who was almost exactly the same age as Ludwig, was also there."
-Page 4 |
"All our children seem very gifted – except for poor, dull Ludwig! I’m not sending my children to schools where they will pick up the Austrian establishment’s bad habits of mind! At the age of 10, I constructed a working model of a sewing–machine out of bits of wood and wire."
-Page 8 |
"He read Leo Tolstoy’s The Gospel in Brief and was deeply influenced by it."
-Page 13 |
"Remember – we just SPEAK to children, and they learn. We don’t have to explain what language is first."
-Page 17 |
"“I see a cherry tree” but can we see the “I” that sees the cherry tree? I look in a mirror. I can see my eyes but can I see the “I” that sees them?"
-Page 19 |
"It is clear that ethics cannot be put into words. Ethics is transcendental"
-Page 19 |
"He distinguished between the relative and the ethical use of “good”."
-Page 20 |
"No amount of reading can do this for us. So the first sentence of the preface to the Tractatus reads: “Perhaps this book will be understood only by someone who has himself already had the thoughts expressed in it — or at least similar thoughts.”"
-Page 21 |
"He was a born teacher, although an unorthodox one. He did not lecture but led the children on by means of questions. He had them inventing a steam engine, learning anatomy by assembling the skeleton of a cat, astronomy by observing the night sky and so on. He put great emphasis on mathematics and taught it to a higher level than was expected of the age group."
-Page 28 |
"For him, everything depended on the spirit in which something is done. This was true for his way of teaching, attitude to cooking and attitude to friends."
-Page 28 |
"Knowledge was intimately connected with doing. ▶ He could design a house, make a sculpture, or conduct an orchestra. ▶ He was an engineer by training and was never at loggerheads with machines. ▶ Music was central to his life."
-Page 38 |
"But can we think a thought internally without language and then report it? If this were so, it would imply there are two processes — language and thoughts. But can you isolate thought from language when you speak thoughtfully? Can we inwardly see our thoughts, as we can feel a pain without groaning?"
-Page 39 |
"It is not like taking a video of a train going by in a flash, and then slowing the video down to see what the train looked like. Thoughts do not go by in parts like the carriages of a train. We think them. We can have half a train but not half a thought — but we may be half way through expressing a thought or may not have worked out all its implications."
-Page 41 |
"We then puzzle over the link between the two: the expressions of our language and the reality with which it deals."
-Page 44 |
"If someone is love-sick, a scientific explanation will not bring him peace, but the right gesture might help."
-Page 49 |
"Does he really love me, or is he only pretending? Do I really love her, or am I kidding myself?"
-Page 53 |
"Wittgenstein’s therapy is concerned not so much with knowledge as with clarifying the language games weaving the inner to the outer."
-Page 56 |
"Understanding language is like understanding music."
-Page 60 |
"Wittgenstein was particularly fond of Leo Tolstoy’s short story, “The Three Hermits”, from Twenty-three Tales (1886). It illustrated for him the depth and seriousness of philosophical problems."
July 31, 2022
I've always been afraid of Wittgenstein. The anfractuous name stands as stern as his gaze, splitting the century into fourths and then into halves, haunting with gaunt contempt the footnotes and appendices of a great many texts. I used to tell people he was boring, because his ideas seemed to neutralize the playfulness of philosophy. Why would I want to do that?
The brief introduction here, which is basically a graphic novel, handily delivers the pill with a spoonful of sugar. It only takes a few hours to read, and proves that Wittgenstein is not as dry as I previously expected. Every term, like "family resemblance," the way the "good" is usable in multiple senses, but undefined, now as a picture attached to it in my mind.
In a graphic book, the speed of which it is read may depend on the illustration real estate. It uses clever callbacks and humor, like a rabbit speaking to the reader or Wittgenstein pulling a student's hair, which actually happened. Since it is mostly illustration, it may be better for readers to think about their own ideas when they read. Thinking about what thoughts are, and their relation to language language which so crude in relation to reality, is actually pretty fun.
It is cut into four sections: first a brief biography, and then his first book in 1928, the Tractatus, then more biography, leading into the marathon of ideas that come from Philosophical Investigations about 20 years after. Wittgenstein is a fascinating person, who had bizarre teaching style that got him kicked out of school. Fun also is his love of puns, and his hatred of academic philosophy.
The ideas sections are split into grids and abstract images that feel very intense, like the "special effects" sections on documentaries. They are also over quite fast before moving on to new things.
Now I feel competent to at least pick up a more thorough intro to his ideas, and know a bit more of what he's talking about when he is referenced. In fact the ideas here have many implications for cognitive psychology that seem to be underplayed in its study, evolved mostly from scientific rituals. I would even describe them as playful.
The animations will likely sear itself as a touchstone or reference point for anytime I read about him in the future, without which I would probably just get bored or scared.
The brief introduction here, which is basically a graphic novel, handily delivers the pill with a spoonful of sugar. It only takes a few hours to read, and proves that Wittgenstein is not as dry as I previously expected. Every term, like "family resemblance," the way the "good" is usable in multiple senses, but undefined, now as a picture attached to it in my mind.
In a graphic book, the speed of which it is read may depend on the illustration real estate. It uses clever callbacks and humor, like a rabbit speaking to the reader or Wittgenstein pulling a student's hair, which actually happened. Since it is mostly illustration, it may be better for readers to think about their own ideas when they read. Thinking about what thoughts are, and their relation to language language which so crude in relation to reality, is actually pretty fun.
It is cut into four sections: first a brief biography, and then his first book in 1928, the Tractatus, then more biography, leading into the marathon of ideas that come from Philosophical Investigations about 20 years after. Wittgenstein is a fascinating person, who had bizarre teaching style that got him kicked out of school. Fun also is his love of puns, and his hatred of academic philosophy.
The ideas sections are split into grids and abstract images that feel very intense, like the "special effects" sections on documentaries. They are also over quite fast before moving on to new things.
Now I feel competent to at least pick up a more thorough intro to his ideas, and know a bit more of what he's talking about when he is referenced. In fact the ideas here have many implications for cognitive psychology that seem to be underplayed in its study, evolved mostly from scientific rituals. I would even describe them as playful.
The animations will likely sear itself as a touchstone or reference point for anytime I read about him in the future, without which I would probably just get bored or scared.
June 5, 2025
Το "Ο Βιτγκενστάιν με εικόνες" του John Heaton είναι μια εισαγωγική αλλά αρκετά απαιτητική ματιά στη φιλοσοφία του Βιτγκενστάιν. Αν και παρουσιάζει τις ιδέες του φιλοσόφου με προσβάσιμο τρόπο, η ίδια η φύση της φιλοσοφίας του, ιδιαίτερα η εξέταση της σχέσης μεταξύ γλώσσας και πραγματικότητας, παραμένει σύνθετη και απαιτεί προσοχή από τον αναγνώστη. Επομένως, παρά το γεγονός ότι είναι ένα βιβλίο, ας πούμε, "για αρχάριους", δεν είναι απλό.
Ο Heaton επικεντρώνεται κυρίως στα δύο πιο σημαντικά έργα του Βιτγκενστάιν: το "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus ", όπου επιχειρεί να ορίσει τα όρια της γλώσσας και της λογικής, υποστηρίζοντας ότι "ό,τι μπορεί να ειπωθεί, μπορεί να ειπωθεί ξεκάθαρα, και ό,τι δεν μπορεί να ειπωθεί, πρέπει να παραμείνει σιωπηλό", και στο "Φιλοσοφικές έρευνες" που ο Βιτγκενστάιν προσεγγίζει τη γλώσσα από μια διαφορετική σκοπιά, εισάγοντας την έννοια των γλωσσικών παιχνιδιών και τονίζοντας τη σημασία της χρήσης και του κοινωνικού πλαισίου στη διαμόρφωση της σημασίας των λέξεων. Αντί να έρχεται σε ρήξη με το Tractatus, το "Φιλοσοφικές έρευνες" λειτουργεί ως μια εξέλιξη και επέκταση της σκέψης του, προσφέροντας μια πιο δυναμική προσέγγιση στη φιλοσοφία της γλώσσας. Επίσης, στο τέλος κάνει μια πολύ συνοπτική εισαγωγή στο "Περί της βεβαιότητας".
Ένα από τα στοιχεία που κάνουν το βιβλίο πιο ελκυστικό είναι τα σκίτσα και οι εικονογραφήσεις που συνοδεύουν το κείμενο. Αυτές οι οπτικές αναπαραστάσεις δεν είναι ότι προσφέρουν ιδιαίτερα στην κατανόηση, αλλά δίνουν και μια ζωντάνια στη φιλοσοφία του Βιτγκενστάιν, κάνοντάς την ίσως κάπως πιο προσιτή. Το βιβλίο καταφέρνει να ισορροπήσει μεταξύ θεωρητικής ανάλυσης και αφηγηματικής παρουσίασης, προσφέροντας μια πολύ καλή εισαγωγή σε έναν από τους πιο επιδραστικούς φιλοσόφους του 20ού αιώνα. Πολύ καλή δουλειά γενικά.
Ο Heaton επικεντρώνεται κυρίως στα δύο πιο σημαντικά έργα του Βιτγκενστάιν: το "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus ", όπου επιχειρεί να ορίσει τα όρια της γλώσσας και της λογικής, υποστηρίζοντας ότι "ό,τι μπορεί να ειπωθεί, μπορεί να ειπωθεί ξεκάθαρα, και ό,τι δεν μπορεί να ειπωθεί, πρέπει να παραμείνει σιωπηλό", και στο "Φιλοσοφικές έρευνες" που ο Βιτγκενστάιν προσεγγίζει τη γλώσσα από μια διαφορετική σκοπιά, εισάγοντας την έννοια των γλωσσικών παιχνιδιών και τονίζοντας τη σημασία της χρήσης και του κοινωνικού πλαισίου στη διαμόρφωση της σημασίας των λέξεων. Αντί να έρχεται σε ρήξη με το Tractatus, το "Φιλοσοφικές έρευνες" λειτουργεί ως μια εξέλιξη και επέκταση της σκέψης του, προσφέροντας μια πιο δυναμική προσέγγιση στη φιλοσοφία της γλώσσας. Επίσης, στο τέλος κάνει μια πολύ συνοπτική εισαγωγή στο "Περί της βεβαιότητας".
Ένα από τα στοιχεία που κάνουν το βιβλίο πιο ελκυστικό είναι τα σκίτσα και οι εικονογραφήσεις που συνοδεύουν το κείμενο. Αυτές οι οπτικές αναπαραστάσεις δεν είναι ότι προσφέρουν ιδιαίτερα στην κατανόηση, αλλά δίνουν και μια ζωντάνια στη φιλοσοφία του Βιτγκενστάιν, κάνοντάς την ίσως κάπως πιο προσιτή. Το βιβλίο καταφέρνει να ισορροπήσει μεταξύ θεωρητικής ανάλυσης και αφηγηματικής παρουσίασης, προσφέροντας μια πολύ καλή εισαγωγή σε έναν από τους πιο επιδραστικούς φιλοσόφους του 20ού αιώνα. Πολύ καλή δουλειά γενικά.
January 9, 2022
Wittgenstein's philosophy aims to "show" what it means, rather than simply "say" what it means. Often because that which he wants to show us, cannot be said. With that in mind, the idea of a graphic guide to Wittgenstein really appealed to me - and, perhaps, would have to Wittgenstein too.
The book is well written, clearly researched, and has a lot of feeling and passion for its subject. However, I came away often more confused than I was before. I have studied Wittgenstein - admittedly, not since my days at university - and believed I had a generally good understanding of his work in certain areas. But despite his desire to "show" rather than "say", some of his ideas require a great deal of "saying" in order for you to "see". Something which isn't possible, or at least wasn't achieved, in this book.
If you're new to Wittgenstein and his work, I'd argue that this probably isn't the best place to start. Unless, you start with the understanding that this book should be used as a ladder to reach a base level of understanding and then, as it were, cast aside.
Read this book for some entertaining insights, but don't read it for any kind of deeper understanding, I don't think that it can provide that for you. Again, this isn't the fault of the writers, who have done tremendously well at making Wittgenstein accessible. The problem is that he isn't particularly accessible, and any attempt would (probably) fail.
I will say, however, that this book has interested me in the graphic approach to understanding and so I will almost certainly check out some of the other guides in this series.
Oh and spoiler alert, Wittgenstein dies in the end.
The book is well written, clearly researched, and has a lot of feeling and passion for its subject. However, I came away often more confused than I was before. I have studied Wittgenstein - admittedly, not since my days at university - and believed I had a generally good understanding of his work in certain areas. But despite his desire to "show" rather than "say", some of his ideas require a great deal of "saying" in order for you to "see". Something which isn't possible, or at least wasn't achieved, in this book.
If you're new to Wittgenstein and his work, I'd argue that this probably isn't the best place to start. Unless, you start with the understanding that this book should be used as a ladder to reach a base level of understanding and then, as it were, cast aside.
Read this book for some entertaining insights, but don't read it for any kind of deeper understanding, I don't think that it can provide that for you. Again, this isn't the fault of the writers, who have done tremendously well at making Wittgenstein accessible. The problem is that he isn't particularly accessible, and any attempt would (probably) fail.
I will say, however, that this book has interested me in the graphic approach to understanding and so I will almost certainly check out some of the other guides in this series.
Oh and spoiler alert, Wittgenstein dies in the end.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 8, 2022
This concise guide offers a sketch of the life of the early twentieth century philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, focusing on the evolution of his philosophical thought. As with other volumes in the series, it begins with biographical background of ancestry and youth before turning its focus to the ideas for which the subject gained fame, occasionally shifting back to more biographical focus to discuss impactful moments from his life. Wittgenstein served in World War I and had a somewhat strange academic career.
Wittgenstein had his hands in a lot of pots, studying the philosophy of logic, ethics, science, mathematics, language, and the mind. The book provides brief summaries of key ideas such as language games, family resemblances (as applied to groupings other than families,) philosophy as a form of therapy, the ubiquity of tautology in logic, the illusion of self, etc. In many cases, the ideas cut across neat boundaries as where questions of language, perception, and the nature of the self may overlap. I found I got the most out of Wittgenstein’s thinking on language and its limits. While some of the ideas were strange, others were illuminating.
This book provides a fine guide for the neophyte looking to be introduced to Wittgenstein’s work. Philosophers will likely find it lacking in depth, but few will find it too complicated or arcane. If you wish to learn more about the life and philosophy of Wittgenstein, it’s worth checking out.
Wittgenstein had his hands in a lot of pots, studying the philosophy of logic, ethics, science, mathematics, language, and the mind. The book provides brief summaries of key ideas such as language games, family resemblances (as applied to groupings other than families,) philosophy as a form of therapy, the ubiquity of tautology in logic, the illusion of self, etc. In many cases, the ideas cut across neat boundaries as where questions of language, perception, and the nature of the self may overlap. I found I got the most out of Wittgenstein’s thinking on language and its limits. While some of the ideas were strange, others were illuminating.
This book provides a fine guide for the neophyte looking to be introduced to Wittgenstein’s work. Philosophers will likely find it lacking in depth, but few will find it too complicated or arcane. If you wish to learn more about the life and philosophy of Wittgenstein, it’s worth checking out.
March 1, 2019
In principle, I do not object trying to introduce a Philosopher’s thought through the medium of a comic book. But this one on Wittgenstein is not very good. Firstly, the artwork is quite bad. And very often with little connection to the content. The biographical part is okay but the part on the Tractatus very shallow. And actually misleading for example when the author mixes up the hippopotamus anecdote with the question of negative facts.
I would have liked to see for example an illustration of the language game about the 5 apples. One could try to visualize it and make it easier to grasp what Wittgenstein is trying to say. In general, there is no point in just stating "conclusions" from Wittgenstein’s work (e.g. the connection of language and thought) even if it is not wrong. One page I did like was on page 136, the inner and the outer, a man and a woman both thinking. She: does he really love me or is he just pretending? He: Do I really love her, or am I just kidding myself? This is excellent. You can think and talk about it, and it will be in a Wittgensteinian spirit. More of this and I would have been happy. 5/10
I would have liked to see for example an illustration of the language game about the 5 apples. One could try to visualize it and make it easier to grasp what Wittgenstein is trying to say. In general, there is no point in just stating "conclusions" from Wittgenstein’s work (e.g. the connection of language and thought) even if it is not wrong. One page I did like was on page 136, the inner and the outer, a man and a woman both thinking. She: does he really love me or is he just pretending? He: Do I really love her, or am I just kidding myself? This is excellent. You can think and talk about it, and it will be in a Wittgensteinian spirit. More of this and I would have been happy. 5/10
August 18, 2021
Great read, with pretty helpful illustrations as well (which I did not expect). Wittgenstein's works in philosophy, just like most other philosophers' works, are incredibly fascinating albeit ridiculously irritating - some of his analogies make me question so much of what is around me, and John Heaton did a great job at capturing such analogies in his book, which summarises Wittgenstein's work and personal life quite well.
I find it quite fascinating how Wittgenstein, without much of a notable qualification, managed to go to Trinity College, Cambridge - one of the infamously most competitive colleges at Cambridge throughout history and today. And also his constant facing of rejection throughout his life, which I find quite inspiring - he fails to get his works published by his own university's (i.e. Cambridge) publishing house, yet persists, and goes on to become one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century. His skills as a polymath as described in the book is also quite inspiring - it's fascinating how he had such a thorough knowledge of so many fields, yet was still not looked at in awe by institutions like Trinity College and Cambridge.
I find it quite fascinating how Wittgenstein, without much of a notable qualification, managed to go to Trinity College, Cambridge - one of the infamously most competitive colleges at Cambridge throughout history and today. And also his constant facing of rejection throughout his life, which I find quite inspiring - he fails to get his works published by his own university's (i.e. Cambridge) publishing house, yet persists, and goes on to become one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th century. His skills as a polymath as described in the book is also quite inspiring - it's fascinating how he had such a thorough knowledge of so many fields, yet was still not looked at in awe by institutions like Trinity College and Cambridge.
May 4, 2025
Quick and easy introduction into the thoughts, ideas, and life of Ludwig Wittgenstein. The accompanying imagery was cool, slightly repetitive. His thoughts on language and meaning, and the inner/ outer world, on certainty vs uncertainty, incredibly fascinating.
“Our relation to ourselves is not one of observation. If we are in pain we are in it, whereas we have to infer other people’s”
This quote is brilliant and is just one of his many objections to objective scientific thought ruling all. His philosophy allows room for mystery and the unknown. While it’s helpful to observe our thoughts and feelings, can we actually observe them? Who is the observer/ observed? How can we truly know another’s experience?
“Nothing is so difficult as not deceiving oneself”
Another bit of wisdom that allows philosophy to be therapy as opposition to self-deception and the problems we think we must suffer from.
Will be reading more of his work, feels like I’m barely grasping what’s being said.
“Our relation to ourselves is not one of observation. If we are in pain we are in it, whereas we have to infer other people’s”
This quote is brilliant and is just one of his many objections to objective scientific thought ruling all. His philosophy allows room for mystery and the unknown. While it’s helpful to observe our thoughts and feelings, can we actually observe them? Who is the observer/ observed? How can we truly know another’s experience?
“Nothing is so difficult as not deceiving oneself”
Another bit of wisdom that allows philosophy to be therapy as opposition to self-deception and the problems we think we must suffer from.
Will be reading more of his work, feels like I’m barely grasping what’s being said.
April 28, 2023
واحد من سلسلة أقدم لك التي تقدم بأسلوب مبسط ورائع العديد من الموضوعات الهامة، والتعريف بفلاسفة ومفكرين كبار، وذلك الكتاب عن الفيلسوف النمساوي "لودفيج جوزيف فتجنشتين"، واحد من الفلاسفة الذين قيل عنهم: "لقد أصبحت الفلسفة بعد فتجنشتين غيرها قبله".
الكتاب كعادة كتب السلسلة يبدأ بتعريف لحياة فتجنشتين، ومشواره العلمي والعملي، ثم يتطرق إلى أهم الأفكار التي عمل عليها، وخاصة كتابه الأشهر "رسالة منطقية فلسفية" وهو الكتاب الذي يضم أفكاره الأساسية.
«نتيجة الفلسفة ليست هي القضايا الفلسفية، بل هي توضيح القضايا؛ ولذا يتكون العمل الفلسفي أساسا من توضيحات»
«إذا استطاع الإنسان حقا أن يكتب كتابا عن الأخلاق، وكان بالفعل كتابا عن الأخلاق، فإن مثل هذا الكتاب سوف يدمر جميع الكتب الأخرى في العالم»
«قد تحدث الفكرة في ومضة سريعة، ولكن روايتها لا يمكن أن تكون كذلك»
الكتاب لطيف وممتع، وطريقة العرض بالرسومات تضفي طابع البساطة على موضوع الكتاب.
الكتاب كعادة كتب السلسلة يبدأ بتعريف لحياة فتجنشتين، ومشواره العلمي والعملي، ثم يتطرق إلى أهم الأفكار التي عمل عليها، وخاصة كتابه الأشهر "رسالة منطقية فلسفية" وهو الكتاب الذي يضم أفكاره الأساسية.
«نتيجة الفلسفة ليست هي القضايا الفلسفية، بل هي توضيح القضايا؛ ولذا يتكون العمل الفلسفي أساسا من توضيحات»
«إذا استطاع الإنسان حقا أن يكتب كتابا عن الأخلاق، وكان بالفعل كتابا عن الأخلاق، فإن مثل هذا الكتاب سوف يدمر جميع الكتب الأخرى في العالم»
«قد تحدث الفكرة في ومضة سريعة، ولكن روايتها لا يمكن أن تكون كذلك»
الكتاب لطيف وممتع، وطريقة العرض بالرسومات تضفي طابع البساطة على موضوع الكتاب.
February 14, 2022
My philosophy discussion group's topic this past month was Wittgenstein. Most of us thought his book, the Tractatus, too difficult or intimidating, so we went to other sources. Yes, I did read some of the Tractatus, but it didn't take very long for me to get bogged down. So I tried the "Introducing" book. Though I'll admit it helped some, I still felt lost. So what did I do? I went to You Tube! There are a ton of lectures that proved to be much more helpful.
I have read some of the "Introducing" books before and honestly, I feel their usefulness is limited. I would recommend going to the original source and then going on line to access lectures, interviews, etc.
I have read some of the "Introducing" books before and honestly, I feel their usefulness is limited. I would recommend going to the original source and then going on line to access lectures, interviews, etc.
December 12, 2024
An entertaining and interesting introduction. I knew next to nothing about W. (not even that he lived for a while by a dark and claustrophobic Norwegian fjord), now I know next to nothing about lots of different things , and I have to rack my brain to remember what I have learned. It is there somewhere in my brain, or maybe it is not. I cannot really prove it. Was I thinking while reading, am I thinking now, I try hard by the look of it, but then again. I will of course have to take a look at the Tractatus, can’t wait to be puzzled and perplexed, to transform into a question mark. That is a fact. Or is it …
June 6, 2017
Es un libro que te introduce de forma más amable a la filosofía Wittgensteniana.
Al estilo Rius, -con dibujitos y toda la cosa- esta publicación contiene un poco de su historia personal, académica, pero sobre todo explica -con palitos y bolitas- sus dos obras capitales: Tractatus lógico-filosófico e Investigaciones filosóficas.
Un excelente libro para comprender el pensamiento y el alcancé que ha tenido -en el arte, en la cultura y en el conocimiento de nuestra realidad- uno de los filósofos más importantes del siglo XX.
Al estilo Rius, -con dibujitos y toda la cosa- esta publicación contiene un poco de su historia personal, académica, pero sobre todo explica -con palitos y bolitas- sus dos obras capitales: Tractatus lógico-filosófico e Investigaciones filosóficas.
Un excelente libro para comprender el pensamiento y el alcancé que ha tenido -en el arte, en la cultura y en el conocimiento de nuestra realidad- uno de los filósofos más importantes del siglo XX.
November 12, 2024
The two authors outline Wittgenstein’s thought, interspersed with illustrative collages. Bertrand Russell regarded Wittgenstein as a genius, so the man must have had it going on, but my reaction to the philosophical wisdom communicated by the authors of this book is “Well, duh.” It seems to all come down to obvious limitations from trying to figure out how language works without being able up step outside of language to do the analysis. And, of course, as a mid-20th century philosopher, Wittgenstein wouldn’t have the benefit of contemporary research on cognitive science or neuroscience.
April 6, 2020
These series are very promising, but I do not think Wittgenstein works best in this format - from the explanations forwarded by this book, there really is no explaining the concepts that Wittgenstein was trying to forward in some of his works. As such, this may feel lacking but understandable. It did get me very curious about reading a few of his works or something which further gets into the work of one of the most innovative and eccentric philosophers of the 20th century.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews