Question

There's been a lot of skeptical questions recently, about knowledge, god, probability, other minds, all sorts of crazy stuff (I'm still waiting for nothing is true)

Can we conclude from Wittgenstein that all philosophy shows just as well that all philosophy is nonsense, by which I mean show that all philosophy fails to picture any state of affairs, no philosophy has all its names map onto simple objects?

That seems like the ultimate skepticism to me.

"most of the propositions and questions to be found in philosophical works are not false but nonsensical" (TLP 4.003). Is, then, philosophy doomed to be nonsense (unsinnig), or, at best, senseless (sinnlos) when it does logic, but, in any case, meaningless? What is left for the philosopher to do, if traditional, or even revolutionary, propositions of metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics, and ethics cannot be formulated in a sensical manner? The reply to these two questions is found in Wittgenstein’s characterization of philosophy: philosophy is not a theory, or a doctrine, but rather an activity. It is an activity of clarification (of thoughts), and more so, of critique (of language). Described by Wittgenstein, it should be the philosopher’s routine activity: to react or respond to the traditional philosophers’ musings by showing them where they go wrong, using the tools provided by logical analysis. In other words, by showing them that (some of) their propositions are nonsense.

Even some of his own work must be recognized as nonsense, presumably in its entirety. Does it show that in a better (or worse) way than a quote from a sitcom or my undergraduate essay? Any philosophical basis to the claim that they are less aesthetically pleasing is, I'd have guessed, arguably nonsense.

It does sound ludicrous, and I'm not rhetorically asking the difference between my undergraduate essay and his Tractatus, but where does that difference lie? I would have assumed some philosophy does it more clearly (and intentionally even), but is that all?

Answer 1

Wittgenstein's perspective that much of philosophy is nonsensical serves to emphasize the importance of clarification and critique in philosophical practice rather than to dismiss all philosophical propositions as meaningless. The difference between philosophical works and everyday discourse, including undergraduate essays, lies in the intent and rigorous logical analysis behind them. Philosophy, as Wittgenstein suggests, is a meaningful activity that aims to untangle language and thought.

Step-by-step explanation:

Ludwig Wittgenstein's remark in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus that much of philosophy is nonsensical has sparked discussions on whether philosophy can ever truly represent reality. Wittgenstein later characterizes philosophy not as a doctrine but as a clarifying activity. To consider Wittgenstein's early and later work as wholly nonsensical would be to misunderstand his intent; he shines light on the misuse and misrepresentation of language. The essence of philosophical activity, according to Wittgenstein, lies in dissecting and critiquing traditional philosophical thought, indicating the difference between senseless philosophical musings and meaningful ones lies in their ability to clarify thoughts and critique language.

The difference between a philosophical work like the Tractatus and everyday discourse, including undergraduate essays, is the rigorous logical framework and intentions behind the philosopher's investigations. Wittgenstein's early preoccupation with logical positivism evolves in his later work, where he emphasizes the role of language in the context of use. Philosophy is thus an ongoing critique of language and thought, aiming to untangle the confused pragmatics of our ordinary language. It's not that all philosophy is meaningless, but that through critical and logical analysis, we can identify what holds meaning and what does not.