269539148 Philosophy of Mind

7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind

1/273


2/273

M I N D S

n

BODIES


3/273

PHILOSOPHY O F MIN D SE RIES

SeriesEditor O w e n F la n a ga n , D u k e U n i v e rs it y

SF.I.F EXPRESS IO N S

M i n d ,

Mor al s ,an d th eM e an in go fL if e

O w en F la na ga n

THE

CONSCIOU S

MI N D

In

Sea rc h

o f a

F u n d a m e n ta l

Theor y

DavidJ .C ha lm e r s

DECONSTRUCTING

TH E

MI N D

StephenP .Stic h

THE

HUMA N ANIMAL

P ersona l I d en t i t y w i t hou t P sycho log y

Eric

T .

O lso n

MINDS

AN D

B O DI E S

Phi losophersa n dThei rIdea s

Co lin McGi n n


4/273

M I N D S

and

ODIES

Philosophers

and

Their Ideas

C O L I N M C G I N N

New York Ox ford Oxford University Press 997


5/273

Oxford

U n iv e rs it y

P re s s

O x f o r dNe wY o r k

A t h e n s

A uc k la n d B a n g k o k B o g o t a B o m ba y B ueno s A ire s

Calcut ta

Cap e

T ow n

Ba re s

Salaa m Delh i F lo renc e

H o n g

K on g

Is ta n b u l K ara c h i K ua l a L u m p u r M a d ra s M a d ri d M elb o u r n e

Mexico

C i t y

N a iro b i P a ri s Sing ap o r e

Ta ip e iToyk oToront o

W arsa w

an d

as so c ia te d c om p a n i e s

i n

Ber l i n

Ib a d a n

C o p y r i g h t

199 7

b y

O x f o r d U n iv e r s i t y Pr e ss, In c .

P u bl is he d b y O x fo r d U n i v e rs i t y

Pres s

198

M a d is o n A v e n u e ,

N e w

Y o rk ,

N e w

Y o r k 1001 6

O x f o r d

i s a r eg is te re d t r a d e m a r k o f O x fo r d

U n i ve rs it y

P re s s

A ll r i g h t s re s e r v e d .N oparto f th i s publ i ca t io nm a y b ereproduced,

stored

i n a r e t r ie v a l s y st e m ,o r tr a n sm i t te d , i n an y fo r m o r b y an y m e a n s ,

e l ec t ron i c ,

m e c h a n i c a l , p h o to c o p y in g , r e c o rd i n g ,

o r

o th e rw i se ,

w i t h o u tth ep r io r

p e rm i s s i o n

o f

O x f o r d U n i v e r s it y P re ss .

L i b r a r y o f C o n g re s s C a t a lo g i n g -i n -P u b l ic a t io n D a t a

M c C i n n ,

C o lin , 1950 -

M i n d sa n d bo d ie s : p h il o so p h er s a n d t he i ri d ea s / C o l i nM c G in n ,

p . cm .

(Ph ilo soph y

o f

m i n d

s e ri es )

I n c l u d e s

i nd e x .

ISBN

0 -1 9 - 51 1 3 5 5 - 1

1.

Ph i lo soph y

o f

m i n d B o o k re vie w s .

2

E t h ic s B o o k r e v ie w s .

3 . M in d a n d b o dy B oo k re vie ws . I .

T itle . I I .

S e r ie s .

B D4 18 .3 .M 38 199 7

128 ' .2 dc20

96-2735 3

1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2

Prin ted

i n th e

U n i te d Sta te s

o f

A m e ric a

on

ac id -f re e

pape r


6/273

Preface

I h a v e n o t r e p r i n te d a l l m y b oo k r e v i e w s in th i s v o l u m e , o m i tt in g t h o s e t h a t

a r e m o r e te c h n i c a l a nd o f

less

genera l i n t e res t . Bu t I ha v e inc luded v i r tua l ly

allth o s e t h a t h a v e a p p e a r e di nno nspe cia l i s t journ als.

They

are re p ro d uc e d

herei nt he i r o rig in a l fo rm .I h a v en o tt h ou gh ti tw o rth w h i l et ore w rit e

ear l ier p iece sin thel ig h to fl a t e r r e f lec t ions , t hough the r ei s infac tve ry li t t le

o f a s u b s t a n t i v e n a t u reI w o u l d w is ht oa l te r .Th e ti tle so f th ep iece s w e r e

original ly

s up plie d b y m y ed ito rs , n ev e r b y m e ; s in c e th es e ge ne ra ll y m e t

with

m y

a p p r o v a l

I

h a v e

le t

t h e m s t an d .

I a m

g r a t e fu l

t o m y

var io us ed ito r s

fo ra l lowin g me to r ep r in t thes e r ev iew s , and fo r i nv i t i ng me to w r i te them in

the f ir s t

p la ce .

I a m

a ls o g r a te f u l

t o

C a th e ri n eM eKeen

fo r

p h oto co p yin g

a bo v e a n d b ey o n d th e c al l o f d u ty .

New

York

C M

January 1997


7/273

his page intentionally left blank


8/273

Contents

Introduction3

I.PHILOSOPHICALL IV E S

1.W it tg e n st ein :

M y Wicked Heart

1 1

2.

W i tt ge n st ein :

Soul

on

Fire

1 8

3.Wittgenstein : Seething2 7

4 .

R u ss ell :

Loftily

Earthy a n dEarthily

Lofty

. . .

3 3

5 . R u ss el l : You W ould Not Want to Be Him3 5

6.Ru ss ell :

The Machine in the Ghost

4 1

7.

Peirce :

Logic and Sadness

4 7

8. A y er : Old Scores5 4

II. M I N D

9.Penrose : Past Computation6 5

10.

Humphrey :

Getting the Wiggle into the Act

7 4

11.Churchland :A Problem Ignored

8 0

12.M arce la n dB isia ch : The L anguage of Awareness8 5

13.N a g el : The View from Nowhere8 8

14.Chalmers :

Wise

Incomprehension1 0 0

15. McGinn:

Out

of Body

Out

of Mind10 5

16.

L yca n

e t a l. :

Imagining an Orgasm 11 2

17.Fodor : Mental Representations

11 8


9/273

Vlll ONTENTS

18.Fodor : Using Common

Sense

12 2

19.

Da vid so n :

Cooling It 12 5

20.D av id so n : Weak Wil ls1 3 3

21.

Davidson: When Is an Action Intentional?

1 3 9

22.P u tn a m :

Ideal

Ju stifications14 2

23.

C ho m sk y :

Rules and Representations 1 4 7

24.Quine :

Theories

and

Things1 5 7

2 5. S tr aw s o nandW a rn oc k :

Reputation

16 4

26.

Sacks : Outpouchings

1 7 1

27.

Stroud :

Not Knowing What We Know 1 7 8

28.

K rip k e : Naming and

Necessity

1 8 1

29.A yer : Significantly Sense less1 8 4

30.B u d d : W ittgenstein s Philosophy

of

Psychology1 8 7

3 1. S ea rl e :

Contract with Reality

1 9 1

32.

D e nn et t : Leftover

Life

to

Live 1 9 7

I I I .ETHIC S

3 3. S in g er :

Eating Animals Is Wrong

2 0 7

34.

F rey :

Beyond

the Moral Pa le

2 1 5

35.Pluhar : Born Free2 1 8

36.Hel dan d Baier : Mothers a nd Moralists22 4

37.

F oot : Good

Things2 3 3

38.

C o llin gw o o d :

Homage

to

Educa tion 2 4 0

39.

Putnam In and Out of the

Mind2 4 7

Index2 5 5


10/273

M I N D S

n

BODIES


11/273



12/273

Introduction

Wri t inga p h il o so p h y b oo k i s a n a r d u o u s a n d ex a cti n g ta sk . O n e d oe s n o t

e m e rg e f ro m t h e e xp erie n c e u n sc a th e d . T h e m e n t a lburdenlie sm a i n l yi n

the

n e c es si t y of k e e p in g a c o m p l e x a rg u m e n t , o r se t o f a r g u m e n t s , i n o n e' s

head

fo r a

l o n gperiod

o f

t ime , cons tan t ly r epe a t ing

an d

r e f in i n g t h e m,

d a y

an d n i gh t u n ti l

the y com e

t o

se e m e i th e r lik e g ib b e ri s h

o r

p l at it u d e s

o r

b o t h. B e r t ra n d R u ss el lw r o t e s om e w h er e th a t

th e

p ro b le m s

o f

log i c

a r e s o

i n h u m a n l y

a b st ra c t t h a tth ep h il o so p h ic a l lo g ic ia n o n l y m a n a g e s re a ll yt o

th ink a bou t th e mfo rf iv em i n u t e sayear . Ru ssel l ian e xag gerat ion,n od o u b t ,

buti t

gives some ide a

o f th e

f ea t

o f

m e n ta l c on to r ti on

needed

t o

sus ta in

th e

abs tr acted s ta t e of m ind r equi r e d t o com ple te a subs tan t ia l wo rk of ph iloso -

p h y .

I t i sa c tua ll y r a th er a m a z in g th a ti th a p p en sa so f t e na s i tdoes(bal le t

d a n c i n g

p e r h a p s p ro v i d e s

a

d i s tan t ana logy) .

A nd

t h e n th e r e

i s the

unp le a s -

an tsens eo fi n se c u ri t y th a t c om e sw it h

it th e

f ee lin go fb e in g c o n s t it u -

t ionally

i n a d e q u a t e t o t h e t as k .

Reviewingph i losoph y books par takes

o f

th i s a rduo usne ss .

Th e

r e v ie w e r ,

n o

les sth a n

th e

w r i te r , m u s t a bs or b

an d

fu ll ym aste r

a

c om p le x

o f

a rg u -

m e n t s ,

g ra sp in g th e w h o l e th e y c o m p o se a n d ap p re c ia ti n g ho w t h e e n ti r e

s t r u c t u r e i sh e ldi np la ce .Thes ea r gu m e n t s m u s t th e nb er e pro d u ce di n

c a ps u le fo r m ,

s o

th a t

th e

reade r

o f th e

re vie w

ca n

fo llo ww ha t

th e

boo k

con ta ins .Thenthe a rg um en ts m us t be eva lua ted , w i th the wea k poin ts iden -

tified

an d

e xp o s ed .Thism e a ns th a t

i t is

nece ssary

to g o one

s te p b e y o n d

th e

a u th o r o fth ebook ,w h op r e su m a b l y th in k she rp os itio n

suf fi c ien t l y

w el l

d e fe nd e d a n d h a s no t a n ti c ipa t e d th e c r it ic i sm smade.Thesecr i t icisms m ust

bef ai ran d

a c c u ra te .

A l lthis

m u s t

b e

d o n e

b y

sym pathe t ica l ly en te r ing in t o


13/273

INTRODU TION

the

in te l lec tua l world

o f the

a u t h o r ,

n o t

s imply im pos ing one ' s

o w n

p e rs p ec -

tive

o n th e

m a t er ia l .

O n e o f th e

h a rde s t t h in g s a b o u t r e v i e w i n g p h i lo s o p h y

b o o ks i s th at o n e m u s t g ra s p t h e t h o u g h t p roc e ss e s o f so m e o n e e ls e , th o u g h

th es e m a y b e v er y d i ff e re n t fr o m o ne ' s o w n . T h e re v ie w e r m u s t re c ap it u -

lateth ep ro ce s so fc o m p o s in gth eb oo k ,an d th e n o ffe ra cr it ica l r e spons e

to it .

In e v e r w r it eaph i losophy rev iew w i thou t f ee l ing moreo rles s c rushedb y

the

t a sk .

It isalw ays

m u c h

harder

than

I

expect.

A t

some po in t

i n

read ing

th e

b o o k ,

I

w o n d e r w h e th e r

I w il lb e

a bl e

t o

w r i t e a n y t h i n g

a t

all:

th e

a u th or ' s

p os itio n r ef us e s t o c om e in t o fo c u s , a n d I h a v e n o id e a w h a t I w a n t t o sa y

a b o u t

it .Then,a f te ra s w e a t yfewd a y s , m a r k e db y at e n s io ni n th ec h es t ,I

begin t o se e th eshap eo fw ha tI

w il l

w r ite .I th in ko f a w o r k ab l ew a y t o

exp oun d th e book ' s m ain thes is , and som e respons e t o i t sugg es ts i t se lf to my

l a b o r i n g m i n d .I n e a r l y a lw a y svowtha t th i si s the l a s t r ev iewI a mg oin gt o

wri te

f o r a

goodl on g tim e .

B u t

t he n

a n

i n t e r e st i n g b o o k c o m e s a lo n g ,

o n e

tha t

I

w a n t

to

re a d a n y w a y ,

and

a bo u t w h ic h

I

t h in k

I m a y

h a v e s o m e t h in g

usefu lt o

say.

S oherew e g oagain.I h av e

bee n

doingthi sno w fo rtw en t y

y e a r s

a n d h a v e ra c k ed u p n e a r l y f i fty o f t he s e m i n d -c ru n c h e r s . I a m d i sc o n -

ce r ted wh e n peop le th in k these

are

ju st tosse d off o n alazyw et w ee ke nd, as if

r ev i ewingw e r ea l e i su r e

ac t iv i ty .

S o w h y d o I d o it ? It in te r fe re s

w it h

m y ow nw o r k ;it'sex ha usti ng;a n d i t

garne rs ver y l i tt le acad em ic c redi t. Th e reaso n i s that I be l ieve it is a va lua ble

fo r m o f w r i ti n g .I t i sva luablefo r m eb e c au s ei tfo rce sm e t oc om et og rip s

withsom eone else 's ideas , ins tead

o fwal lowing

co ns tant ly

in m y

own.

I

would

r e c o m m e n di t t o a l l phi losop hers , especia ll ya t th es ta r to ft h e i r c a re e rs .I t

e n c ou r ag e s s ou n d in t el le c tu a l h a b it s , b y e n fo r c in g co n c is io n , c l ar it y , a n d

in te l lec tuale m p a th y n o t

t o

m ent io n c ri ti ca l r espons ib il ity .

I t

a ls o d is co u r -

agesth ek in do f intel lectu al sol ipsism th ataffl ict ss om any academ ic ph iloso -

ph e r s .

B u t i t i sva luab le,

too,

i na f f o rd i n g c o n ta ct w i t h t h i n k i n g p e o p lew h o

are no t profess iona l ly inv olved in phi losophy.HereI am spe aking o f reviews

wri t t en ,

no t fo r profess io na l jou rna ls, bu t fo r publ ica t ion s tha t re p r e s e n tth e

wide r in te l lec tua l cu l tu re . Mos t o f the rev iew s inc luded i n th i s vo lum e were

wri t t en fo r

s u c h p u b l ic a ti o n s t h e Times Literary Supplement

th e

London R e -

view

of

Books

th e N ew Republic an d o th er s .Th ed i ff ic u lt yo f th etas kishere

c o m p o u n d e d b y the

f ac t

tha t on e m us t wri te in such a w ay that th e in te res te d

l a y m a n

canfol lo ww ha t is be ing sa id , wh i ledo ingjus t ice to the co nten t of th e

book

i n

q u e stio n . A c c o rd in g

t o th e

e d ito r s

o f

th es e m a g a zin e s ,

no t

m an y

specialistscan do

tha t .

Y et

such m agaz ines

are on e o f the

on ly p laces

in

w hich

academic ph i losoph y

i s

pub li c ly hea rd .

I

m y s el f be lie v e

i t t o b e

e xtr em e l y

i m p o r ta n t t ha t th e w id e r cu lt ur e b e in f or m e d o f w h a t i s h a p p en in g i naca-

d e m i cph i losophy; indeed ,I believeit to bev i ta lto t h e intel lectual healtho f a

c o m m u n i t yt h a t s er io u s ph ilo so ph ic a l w o r k

b e

b ro ug h t b efo r e

th e

p ub li c

m i n d . Th i s

i s

because ph i losophica l p rob lem s

a r e

p ar t

o f

e v e ry o n e ' s m e n t a l

l andscape ,s opeopleshou ldb em a d e aw a r eof theb es t th a ti sbe ing don et o

dea l wi th these p rob lems . Also ,

thereis so

m u ch

ba d

s tu f f

o u t

therecomp e l-


14/273

INTRO U TION

ingfor a t tent io n tha t i t is imp ortant t o put th e good

s tu f f

ac ros s t o peop le. I n

shor t ,Ibe l ievein m ysubject ,andI w a n ttoe du c a t e p e o p l ei n i t a sbestIcan .

The

t ro u bl e

i s

t h a t b o o k r e vi ew s

in

suc h pub l ica t ion s t end

t o

h a v e

a

very

shor t "she l f

l ife" a

m a t te ro fw eek s usu a l ly. Theya r ec o m p a ra ti v e l y

wid e ly

r ea d w h e n th e y a p p e a r , b u t t h e y so o n d i sa p p ea r i n t othem is ty pas t. I hav e

always f o u n d t hi s d i sp i ri ti n g :

s o

m u c h e ffo r t

fo r a

r e s u l t th a t la st s su c h

a

s ho r t t im e .

A n d I

o fte n

p u t

id ea s in t o

m y

re vie w s th a t

I d o n o t

e xp res s

a n y w h e r ee lse , s oth a tidea s I w ou l d lik e t o hav e som e p e rm a n e n c e ar e

quicklyfo rgo t t en . I am the re fo re hap p y to be ab le to

p ro l ong

the

l ife

o f so m e

o f th e s e p ie ce s b y r e s u r re c t i n g th e m n o w i n b oo k f o rm . I

hope

t h a t g e n e ra l

r ea d e rs w i t h

a

tas te

fo r

p h il o so p h yw il lf in d

th e

co l l ec t io nuse fu l ,

a s

p r o v id -

in g a na cc essib l e w in d o w i n t o w h a t m u s t so m etim e s see m l ik ea

w ilf ull y

a rcane wo r ld . S ince I h a v e re v ie w e d bo o k sb y m a n yo f th el e a d i n g p hi lo s o -

ph ers o f our t ime , i t is to be

hoped

th a t the col lec tion o ffers a p ic ture of w hat

has

beengoing o n in ph i losophy for th e las t tw en ty years or so .Thisbook can

t h u sb es ee na s a ra t h e r u n o r t h o d o x i n tr o d u c t io nt oc o n t e m p o r a r y p h ilo so -

p h y .

I a m s om e tim e s c ha rg e d

w it h

h a v i n g a n ex ce ss iv el y ac er bi c re v ie w i n g

style.

A nd i t isqui te t rue tha tI can besev ere ly criticalofw h a tI a mrev iewing .

Im us t confess tha tI h a v ea som ew hat v iscera l reac tiont ow o r kIpe rce iv et o

b e sh o dd y o r d i sh o n e st , a n d I s e e n o p o in t i n c o n c ea li n g m y o p i n io n . I h a v e

the re fo re m ad e m an y "enemies" du r in g the course o f the la s t tw en ty yea rs of

cr i t ic ism.T he p la i nfacti s that eve ry au thor wa n t s to be rev iewe d in t e rm s o f

abso lu te lyu n q u a l if ie d p ra is e( Ii n cl ud em y s elf) ,eve n th ou g h the yd o n o t

w a n t v ryon

t o b e s o la u d ed . O n se ve ra l o cc asio n s I h a v e b ee n c o n gr a tu -

l at ed b y A f o r h a v i n g sp o k e n th e u n f l a t t e r i n g t r u th a b o u t B ' s b o o k , o n l y to

find

myse l f

th e

ob jec t

o f a n

a n g r y c o m m u n i ca t io n fr o m

A fo r

h a v in gdared

to criticizeh is lateste f fo r tw hi let h e s ta n d a rd s I h av e a pp lie d a r e p re ci se l y

th e sa m e i n th e tw o cases .

That ,

a s t he y la ug h in g l y sa y , i s h u m a n n a tu r e .

Never the less ,I have of tenf el tth a t the cos t in te rms o f

pe r s ona l

en m ity is not

w or th it .

There

i s a co ns tantconflictin book cr i t ic ism be tw een theurgeto be

t r u t h fu l

a n d a w a ren e s s o f t h e c o n s e qu e n c e s o f ca n do r. A n d t h e b et te r o n e is

a t de tec t ing the fau l t s in someon e els e' s wo rk , thegreatert h e r e se n t m e n t a t

h a v i n g do n es o . I s e e no w a y out o ft h i s d i le m m a ex ce p tt ocease rev iewing ,

bu t

tha t seem s

to o

c ow a rd l y

a

s o lu ti on .

I c a n

o n l y p lea d

t o

th os e

I

hav e

crit icizedt h a t m y i n te n t io n s h a v e

a lways

been t o t el l the t ru t h a s I s ee i t. I f I

am w r on go ru n f a ir , t h a t

wi l l

u l t im ate l y ref lec t badlyo n m e no t o nthem .

Them i r ro r i m a g eo fthis ,a nda ls o som eth ingI have exper ience dmor e t h a n

once ,i s thet e nd e n c yt o b eove rgene rousi n

one 's

assessmen to f abook.This

p ro d uc es a p ec ulia r na gg in g fe elin g , a s i f on e ha s be tr ay e d on e' s

h ig he r

ideals.Th em o ra l r is k sinb oo k r e v ie w i n ga rev e r y r ea l ;an yr e vi ew e r w o rt h

he r s al t

feels

the m keen ly . I can a s su re anyone whos e book I have nega tive ly

reviewed (o r pos it ive l y rev iewed ) tha t thes e ri sk s hav ea lw a y sb ee nupper -

mos ti n m ym i nd .I d i s like un fa i rnes sa sm u c ha sa n y o n e ,b u t I a ls o dis lik e

c r av e n m e a l y -m o u t h e d b a c k - sc r a tc h in g .


15/273

OINTRODUCTIO N

This

i s a very mixed col lec t ion , rang ing across p re t ty m uc h the w hole f ie ld

of

p h il o so p h y ,

a sw el la s

d i p p i n g in t o i n te ll e ct u a l b io g r a p h y .

B u t th e m a -

jor i ty

o f the

p ieces have

to dowi thth e

m i n d ,

in one w ay or

a n o t h e r .

I t

m i g h t

b e h e l p f u l if I i de n t if y so m e th e t h e m e s t ha t h a v e g o v e rn e d m y t r e a t m e n t o f

thei ssues cov e red; these cha rac te r izem yg e n e ra l a p p ro a c ht oph i losophica l

ques t ions . F i r st , an d l eas t con t rove rs ia l ly , I s tou t l yaf f i rmt h e prin cip le s o f

rat ionali ty

an d

objec tiv e t ru th. Dispas siona t e reason

i s th e

r ig h t

w a y to

deal

withth e

q u es ti on s t ha t p u z zl e

u s , n o t

r he to r i c

o r

p o l iti ca l c o n v e n ie n c e .

I

a p p ly th i s m e t ho da sm u c ht oe th ic sa s t om e t a p h y si c san dp h ilo so p h yo f

m i n d . R e la tiv is m a n d s ub je ctiv is m n e v e r ra is e th e i ru g l yh ead s i n

th es e

pages . C la r it y

an d

r igo r

o f

a rg u m en t

a r e th e

sta n d ar d sadhere d

to .

But,

second, I a lso oppo ses c i e n ti sm t h et end ency to th ink tha t a l l genu ine ques -

t ions arescientifi c in na ture an d ar e to be se tt led by em pir ical metho ds . I tak e

phi losophica l ques t ions

to be a

dis t inc t ive

t y p o f

ques t ion ,

not to be

a n s w e re d

by th e p r ev a il in g p a ra d ig m s o f sc ie nc e . I n e th ic s ,too ,I re je c t sc i en t is m ,

t ak ing

e th ic a l q ue stio n s t o b e

sui generis

an d no t i n an y w a y in fe rio r t o

scientificques t ions . Taking thes e tw o pr inc ip les toge ther , then , I be l ieve in a

f o rm o f

ra t ion a l i ty that

is notscient ifi cin

n a t u r e .

I t is not

t h a t

thereis

science

on t h e o n e

h a n d

an di r ra t iona l is mo n t heother.

Ra the r ,

th e

n o t io n

o f

ra tio -

nality

ha s

subvar ie t ies ,

of

w h i c h

scientific

ra t iona l i ty

is

on ly one . Ph i losophy ,

i nc lud ing

eth ics , exhibits

its own

k in d

o f

ra t iona l i ty ,

in

w h i ch

argumentis th e

keym e th od ,

n o t

e m p i ri ca l i n v e st ig a t io n .

T o

tho s e

re ad er sw h o

ha v e

ru n

away

w i th the idea tha t twe n t i e th -cen tu ry ph i losophy has d one aw a y w i th the

n o t io n s o f o b je c ti v e t r u t h a n d u n i v e r s a l r e as o n, l e t m e a ss er t c a te g o r ic a ll y

t h a t t h a t

i s no t t h e

case . Such

a

pos i tio n

i s the

p r o p er t y

o f a n

i rr e sp o n s i bl e

( an d c o n f u se d ) fe w ;

i t i s

ve ry

fa r

fr o m o rth od o x .

More subs tan t ive ly , I am gu ide d i n these e ssays by a com m i tment t o w ha t

is

s o m e t im e s ca lle d m e t a p h y s i c a l re a li sm .

That

is , I ta k e b ot h th e ex te rn a l

w o r l d

a n d th e

w o r l d

o f the

m i n d

t o be

equa l ly

and

ful l y

r e a l d o m a in s .

I

t h u s

reject,o n t h e o n eh a n d ,a l lformso f idea l ism ab outth ephys ica l w or ld:

there

is

n o s e ns e i n w h i c h the w o r l d o f p la n e t s an d p l a n t s an d p l a ty p u s e s is m i n d -

de p e n de n t ,stil lles s "soc ia lly cons t ruc ted ." A nd ,

o n th eother

h a nd ,

I

re jec t

behavior ism a n di n s t ru m e n t a l i s m

a b o u t

th e

m i n d : t h o u g h t s

a n d

fee l ing s

a re

as

rea la san y th ing e ls ew ere fe rto , a n dth e ya r e n o t t o b er e d u c e dt o

mere

behavioro r

t rea ted

as dispensable constructs .Theun ive rs e thus con ta instwo

sorts ofent i typhysica lth ings and m enta l th ings nei the r be ing a s s im i lab le

t o t h e o th e r . A n d th i s m e a n s,

obv ious ly ,

t h a t

there

i s a p ro b le m a bo u t h o w

these equa ll y rea lbu td is ti n c t t h in g sa r er e la te dt oea c h

o t he r t h e

m in d -

b od y pr ob le m .

Tha t

p rob le m doe sno texis ti feithe ro f th e tw o ca n b e

analyzed

in t e rm s o f the o the r , o r i f the real it y o f e ithe r i s doub ted.M an yo f

th e e ssa y s th a t fo llo w d ea l w i t h th i s p ro b le m i n on e fo r m o r an o th e r . M y

genera l pos it io n

i s to

t ak e

th e

p ro bl e m

a s

genu ine

a n d a s

e x tr e m e l y h a rd .

I

d o no t

be l ieve tha t

a n y

c u r r en t t he o r y m a k e s

as ignif icantdentin the

m i nd -

body

prob lem .

I

thus hold tha t

th e

re lat ion be tw ee n

the

m i n d

a n d t h e

b o dy

is

a

deep

m ys te ry . More tha n tha t , there

a r e

hin ts

in

these essay s

thatI

take

i t to


16/273

INTRO U TION

be apermanentmystery.Thisis apositionIhave

argued

forelsewhere,inThe

roblem of onsciousness(B a si l B la c k w e ll ,

1991 )

an d Problems in

Philosophy

( Ba si l B l a c kw e l l ,

1993) ;

I

mention

i t now

because

it

informs

my

attitude

t o

many

o f th e book s discusse d

here .

I t i s a positio n directl y relate d t o th e

realism just

affirmed :

fo rthereis a mystery about the relatio n between th e

physical

and the

mental only because both

are

real constituents

of the

world.

Something

can

transcend

ou r

power s

of

understanding onl y

if its

nature

is

not

constitute d

o r

constraine d

b y

those powers .

I t i s

because trut h

i s no t

epistemic that

there

is room fo r th e

possibilit y

that the nature o f mind an d

matter migh t not b e accessible to human thought .

Beyondthes e four assumption s I am guided by nothing excep t th e par -

ticular

topic at hand. I try to be as open-minded a s possible, without (as some

w it

once

said)

letting

my

brain

fa l l

out .

I

hope tha t

the

virtues

of

forthrigh t

intellectualexchangew il l

be

evident

to

readers; though t thrive s bes t when

continuallypu t t o the challenge . Rational argument i sst i l lone o f th e mos t

powerfulforce s eve r t o grac e thi s

l it t l e

plane t o f ours . I t deserve s t o b e

encouragedand

celebrate d

i n al l its

forms.

This

book

i s mytributeto th e

powers

of

human reason ,

a sw e l la s an

acknowledgment

of its

limitations.


17/273



18/273

I

PHILOSOPHICALLIVES


19/273



20/273

1

Wittgenstein:M y

Wicked Heart

Ludwig

Wittgenstein:

The Duty of

Genius

byRay

Monk

Cape, 199 0

Ludwig Wittgenstein:

A

Student s Memoir

byTheodore

Redpat h

Duckworth,

199 0

Was Wittgenstein a spiritua l as well as a philosophical genius ? Ray Monk's

exceptionally

fine and fat

biography put s

us in abetter

position

to

answer this

question tha nw ehave been hitherto .

Perhapsth ebest placetobegin tryin gtounderstand Wittgenstein' s char -

acter i s with th e photograph s tha t exis t o f hi s face . H e himsel f advise d

friendst o paymore

attentio n

topeople'sfacesan dofte n

passe d

remark s

aboutthefacesofothers , saying (accordingtoTheodoreRedpath)ofLocke

thathe had "anice face,"ofDescartes tha the had"th e fac eof a

murderer,"

of

T.S.Eliot thathe had " a

modern

face" (meant disapprovingly).Irecom -

mend,inparticular,astriking

picture

ofWittgenstein,

reproduced

inMonk's

book, which was taken in Swansea in 194 5 by Ben Richardsa young ma n

almost forty years Wittgenstein's junior, with whom he was then despairingl y

inlove .

Even

at

thi s distance

of

time,

and i n

two-dimensional monochrome,

i t is

hard

t o

meet Wittgenstein' s gazef u l l

o n for

ver y long.

The

eye sengage

you

immediately: the y ar e implorin g eyes , ye t wit h a n intens erag eflarin g

j u s t

behin d th e iris , sending of f a n unnervin g blen d o f supplicatio n an d

admonitionyour ow n eye sr e fl e x iv e l yreboun d fro m them . Framin g th e

scaldingice ofthese eye sare thesharply

scored

facial linesof theorbitsand

brow, which havetheinformal exactitudeof thenumbered paragraphstha t

makeup hi sbooks.Th eexclamator y shoc ko fhai r bring sa nincongruou s

Reprinted

w i t h

permissionfrom

t h e London

Reviewof ooks (N o v em b e r

22 ,

1990).


21/273

2 PHILOS OPHICAL LIVES

boyishness

i n t o th e fa ce .Therei s a s c o rn f u l

l ift

t o th e f in e l y sc u lp te d n o se .

T he m o u t h i s d is ta n c in g l y t ig ht a n d y e t m i n u t el y p u c k e r e d , a s i f se n su a ll y

re s t ra ined , b leak l yk issless.A s li g h t ti lt o f t h e h e a d w a rn s o f a de n u n c i a t o r y

accessin the

o f f in g .

Th e loo k i s s imu l taneous ly de li cate and m i l it a ry ,

tender

and fe roc ious . I f you s t a re

hard

a t t h ef ac e ,i t seems to

shif t

a sp e c t f ro m o n e

of

th es e p o le s t o th e o th e r , m u c h a s h i s f a m o u s d u c k - r a b b i t d r a w i n g

d o es :

f rom s a in t l y

to

de m o n icar idback aga in .

Y ou

feel

th e

exc it emen t

an d

p e ri l

o f

an e n co u n t e rw it hth e

man.

Hese em s b o t h h a r s han dg e ntl e ,o n e o fth es e

t rai ts r ep lac in g th e o the rw it hn o c ha n g e o f u n d e r ly i n g f o r m , a s if a n

"am-

bigu ous soul" info rm s theface .I t is afacetha t s end s a spear o f doub t in t o the

coreo fy o u row n i n t e g r i t y :yet i ts t e rn ly r ep e l sa l li n c u rs io n s f ro m o u t si d e .

Y oum i g h tsa y thatit is thef ac eof an

e x e c u t io n e r t h o u g h

a ne x e c u t i o n e ro f

a

ve r y spec ia l k ind .

The

b a r efact s

o f

W i tt g e n s te i n ' s

lifea r e b y no wf ai rl y

w el lk no w n :

th e

diff icul tyh a s b een t o d i sc e rn i n t h e m a n in t el li gi bl e h u m a n b e in g . B o rn i n t o

a r ich an dr i ch l yc u l tu r e d V ie n n e s efami lyi n 1889 , a f ami ly of ach ieve rs an d

suicides ,h e to o k u p th e st ud y o f e n g in e e ri n g , w h ic h b ro u g ht h i m t o M a n -

ches ter

t o d o

resea rc h

o n

k it es .

Th is

le d h i m t o

m o r e pu r e l y m a th e m a ti ca l

in teres t s ,

an d th en c e t o th e fo un d atio n s o f m a th em a t ic s , w h e n h e cam e

ac ros s Russe l l' s

Principles o f Mathematics

P h il os o ph y s ur ge d t h ro u g h

hi m

an d, a t Frege ' s sugg es t ion , he w en t to Cam bridge t o s tud y wi th Russe l l. W ith

p h e n o m e n a l s pe e d

h e

impres se d Russe l l w i th

h is

logica l ta lents : indeed ,

h e

vir tua l lydes t roye d Russe l l' s own phi losoph ica l con f iden ce . The spi r i tua ltor-

m e n t th a t m a r k e d hi slifew a s al re a dy m u c h i n e v i de n c e a t t h i s t im e , a s w a s

his

p o w e r o ve r oth er s .

Ab r u p t l y

h e d ec id e d t o g o a n d

liv e

a l o n e i n N o rw a y fo r t w o y e a r s s o t h a t

h e c ou l d w o r k o n lo gi c i n co m p le t e is ola tio n .

T hi s

p la n w a s th w a rte d b y

W orld W a r I , w hich saw W it tgen s te in, fi rs t, behind th e l ines and then , volun -

t a r i ly ,

a t the f ron t . He wa s decorated fo r consp icuous b rave ry , hav ing chosen

them o s t d a n g er o u s p o si tio n a v a il ab l eto

him,

th eo b s erv a ti o n p o st ;a n d h e

alsow o rk edfitfully on the Tractatus H e finishedtha t s ea r ing book soo n a f t e r

t he w a r

e n d e d ,

b u t h e c o u l d n o t fi n d a p u b l is h e r ; n e i th e r w a s it w e ll

u n d e r-

stood

b y

R u ss el l

an d

F reg e ,

h i s tw og re a t

m e n to r s . E v e n tu a ll y , h o w e v e r,

Russell 's

i n f lu e n c e

l e d t o it s

publ ica t ion

i n

G e rm a n

an d

E n g l is h .

W i tt g en s te in th e n b ec a m ea ne l e m e n t a ry s ch o o lt ea c he ri n r u r a l A u s t ri a ,

l iving

in ext reme p ov er t y and d ec l in in g the he lp o f h is a r is tocra t icfami ly .H e

qu i tth is job w he n his puni t ive disc ip l inary me thods go t h im in to t roub le w i th

hispu p i l s' pa ren t s,

arid

he eve ntu a l ly fou nd his way back to Ca m bridg e , a f te r

s p e n d i n g a y e a r de s i g n in g a h o u s e f o r h i s s is te r . T h e

Tractatus

was by no w

c ele bra te d b y th e lo gic a l po sitiv is ts , w h o co n tr iv e d t o ig n or e it s m y stic a l

th rus t . H i s own a t t itude tow ard th e boo k was one o f g row ing re t rac tion , an d

heb e ga nt ow o r ko u t a n e wp h i l o s o p h y .

H e n ex t m a d ee f fo r t s t o secure m an ua l w ork in Russ ia but the au tho r i t i e s

therew o u l d o n l y allo wh im t ot ea c h p h i lo s o p h y ,s o h egav eu p th eidea o f

e m i g ra t i o n .

H e

c o n s i de r e d t r a in i n g

a s a

doc tor ins tead ,

bu t

carried

o n

w o r k -


22/273

W I T T G E N S T E I N : M Y W I C K E D H E A R T 1 3

in g ou t h i s n e w p h il os o ph ic a l id ea s . I n 193 9 h e w a s e le cte d G . E . M o o re ' s

successor

i n

C a m b rid g e , w h i c h he lp e d

h i m

av oi d N a z i p er se c u ti o n ,

bu t h e

f o u n d

th e

pos ts t if li ng .

H e

w a nte d

t o

c o n t r i b u t e

t o th e w a r

e f fo r t ,

i n d u e

course exchang in g h i s p ro fes so r ia l du t i e s fo r those o f a d i spensa ry

porte r

a t

Guy 's

H os p it al .

A f t e rth e w a r here luc tant lyr e t u r n e dt oC a m b r id g e , w h e r eh ew o rk e do n

the

m a t er ia l t h a t

w a s t o

b e co m e

Philosophical

Investigations d o m i n a t i n g

th e

phi losophica l scen e there .Hi sdissa t i sfac t ion wi th Cam bridge , academ i cl if e ,

a n d E n g l a n d g e ne ra ll y (" th e d i si n te g r at in g a n d p u t r e f y in g E n glis hcivil isa -

tio n ") c u l m i n a te d i n hi s r es ig n in g hi s c ha i r an d go in g t o liv ear idw o r k i n

so l i tudein Irela nd . Th e las t two yea rs of his

life

h e spe n t l iving as the gues t of

var ious

f r i e n ds , h a v i ng n o i n c o m e a n d n o h o m e o f h i s o w n . H e die d i n

195 1

of

c a n ce r o f th e p ro sta te , n o t l iv in g to se e th e p u blic atio n o f th e w o r k t h a t

h a d o c cu p ie d th e s ec o n d h al f o f h i s lif e .

W h a t k i n d

o f

cha rac te r

w a s it

tha t carve d

ou t

th i s excep tionall ife ?Three

episodes in i t a re par t icu lar l y te l l ing. Fi rs t , the re a r e h i s ac ts of mi l i ta ry va lor

during

W or ld

W a r I ,w h ic ha r eeas il y m iscons t rued .I t w a s n ot a

matter

o f

pat r io t i sm

o r co m rad e l y

s o lid arity i nfac t ,

h e d e te s te d an d despise d

theo t h e r s ol die rs ;i t w a s

r a t h e r

a nexerci s ei ns e l f-p u r if i ca t io n ,ap ro o ft o

himsel f

tha t

h e

could l ive

in the

r igh t sp i r i t .

The

w a r ,

he

said, saved

h im

f ro m

su ic ide b y e f fec t in ga t r a n sf o rm a t i o no f hi ss o u l :i tenab le dh i m t oa c h ie v e

the

s ta t e

o f

e th ic a l s er io u sn e s s

h e

so ug ht .

I t w a s i n th e

s am e sp iri t th a t

heg av eawayh isvas t inhe r it ed w ea l t htoa l re a dy r ic h m e m b e r so f h i sf ami ly .

This

ha dn o th in gt o d ow it ha s en s eo fe co n o m i c in j u st ic eo rc o m p a ss io n

forth epoor :i t w a spu re lya m a t t e ro fe x p e ll in g f ro mh i slifea n y t h in g th a t

m i g h tc o m p r o m i s e th e i n te g r it y o f h i s

s p i r it a n

ac tm o r eo fp r id et ha n o f

generos i ty .

The th i r d notable inc ide n t is that of h is bruta l t rea tm ent o f chi ldren a t th e

school in Ot te r tha l an d th e cour t case a t which he lied about th e ex ten t of the

c or po ra l p u n i s h m e n th ea dm i n i s te r e d ; a n d , y e ar s l a t e r ,th er e t u r n th er et o

apolog ize

t o t h e

c h i ld r e n

fo r

th i s v io lence .

I t

s h o ul d

b e

n o te d

her e

t ha t

th e

h air pu ll in g an d ea r b ox in g w e r em o r eo f t e n th e r e su l t o f W i lt tg e n st ei n 's

i m p a t i e n c ew i t hsom e

o f h i s

d i m m e r pu p il s ' s lo w n es s

to

m ak ep r og re s s

i n

a lg e br a t h a n th e y w e r e p u n i s h m e n t f o r o rd i n a r y b a d b e h av i o r . I n t h i s e p i-

sode we see over t v io lence center ing o n in te l lec tua l im pat ien ce, accomp anie d

byd i sh o n es t y a b ou t th i s vi ol en c e .

This

i n ci d en t w a s ,

i t

a p p ea r s ,

th e

c hie f

subjec t

o f th e to rt ur e d c on fe ss io n sh e

la te r

m ad et o

f rie n ds a g ai n

a s a

m e a n st osel f purga t ion.

M o n kna r ra te s th i s

life

wi thu n d e r s t a n d i n g , c a re , i n d u s t ry ,

a nd

e x em p l a r y

impar t ia l i ty .

H e ha s ha dful lacces s t o th e m ate ria l i n th e possessio n o f

Wit tgenste in ' s

l it e r a r y e x e c ut o rs ,h i sk n o w le d g eo f th ep h il os o p hi ca la n d

c u l t u r a lb a c k g r o u n d i s

de ep

and ex tens ive , and h e possesses exac t ly the r igh t

combina t ion

o f

c e n su r e

an d

sy m p ath y .A f t e rr ea din g

h i s

b o o k

I

f el t th a t

I

had fi na ll yb eg u nt og ra s p w h a t k in do fm a nW i ttg e ns te i n w as ,a sw el la s

l e a rn i n g a

good

dea l abou t th e re la tio n be twee n h i slifean d h i s work. I

hope


23/273

4 PHILOSOPHICAL LIVES

th e b oo k i s w id e l y

read

b o t h in sid e an d ou tsid e ac ad em i c p hilo so p hy , e s -

pecially

ou t s id e .I t i s ac ons id e ra b l e a c h ie ve m e n t .

Russell

wrote da rk ly of W i t tgens te in : "He wa s a ve ry s ingular m an , and I

d o ub t w h e th e r h i s d isc ip le s k n e w w h a t m a n n e r o f a m a n h e w a s. "

Those

disciples,by the

w a y ,

w ho a re

sai d

to

m imic W it tgens te in 'smanner,m ight

b e

interested

t o

le a r n fr o m R e d p a t h t ha t W i tt ge n st ei n to l d

h i m

tha t

h e ha d

picked

u p

m a n n e ri sm s

of

speech

an d

ge s tu r e f r om F r e ge th e a r c h e ne m y

a s

fara s some of these d isc iples are conc erned . Ou t o f what ingred ients was th is

s ingular

m a n

c om p o s e d ?Here

i s a

sum m ary li st :

h e w a s

vain, se l f-absorbed,

emot ional ly

so l ips i st ic ; he ha te d th e a r ti fi c ia l it y and pre ten t iousnes s o f un i -

versi tylife , fa v o r in gth e c o m p a n y o f "o r d in a r y pe o ple " ; h e ha d a d e e p lo v e

of mu s ic and rude l y r igorou s s tandard s of mu s ica l qua l i ty; he re l ished hard -

boi led Amer ican detect ive s tor ies ,

a swel la s

Ho l lyw ood W e s t e rn s

an d

m u si -

cals;

h is

sense

of

h u m o r c o ul d

b e

s u r p r is i ng ly pue r il e, th oug h od dl y e nd e a r -

ing ;h e w a s pa ss iona te a nd d e m a nd in g i n pe r s ona l re la ti ons ye t o ft en c a p ri -

ciouslycold;

h e

held

(a t

lea st

at one

t im e ) that

Je w s

w ere incap able

of

g e n u i n e

originali ty,

here fo l low ingthew e i rd theorieso fOttoW e in inge r;a n d h e h a d

a

d if fi c u l tt im e d ea lin g w it h

hi s

s exua l it y . W h a t

a r e w e t o

m ak e

o f

thes e

d i s pa ra t e ing r e d i e n t s ?

H o w d o

th e y h an g to g e th e r ?

The ke y seems to l ie in the pr id e fo r which he ceaseless ly

berated

h im se l f .

Ev e ry t h i n gi n h i sl if es ee m e d e it he r t o b ols te r th i sprideo r t o co n sis t i n a n

effor t

t o

d is m a n tl e

it .

P h i lo s oph y , e ss e n ti a ll y

a

p r id e fu l s ub je c t ,

an d s o a

potential ly hum i l ia tin g one , wa s a ch ie f source o f the conce i t he s t rov e con-

stant lyt o

e x ti rp a te : h en c e

th e

se l f- cance l lin g

m e ta p hi lo s o ph y o f

b ot h

th e

Tractatusan d th e Investigations Th e ru th le s s d om ina tio n o f o thers , s o

n u m b i n g l y

appl ied

t o

yo ung acolytes , sprang fro m

h i s

co nvic t ion

of hi s

intel-

l ec tual

an d

m or a l supe r io r it y ,

a nd s o h ad t o be

accom panied

b y

dec la ra t ion s

of h is ow n

l ac k

o f"decency. " Ev e nthed i f fi cu lt yh e ha d i nstayin g ph ysica lly

close

t o th os e h e lo ve d sh ow s h i s in a bilit y t o g iv e

h imse l f

u p t o

another :

no th ing m us t enc roa c h o n th e c h a r m e dregio nof his ow n spir i t . Sexfeltl ik e

afal lf ro m th i s exal ted s ta te ,as i fh i s ow nbody w erea na f f r o n tto hisprideof

soul. Hislif ew a s

thus

a n

inso luble a l t e rna t ion be tw ee n se l f- ce lebra tio n

an d

se l f -condemna t ion .Th e

c o rn y h u m o r

a n d

tas te

fo r

popu la r c u l t u r e func t ion

l ikeou tpo s ts of h is psy che to w hich he could f lee to escape h ispridea n d th e

self- loathing i t in ev ita bl y p ro d uc ed . Thi s ex pla in s th e se ns e on e ha s th a t

these pocke t s o f h i s pe r sona l i ty a r e cur ious l yremotef r o m t h e c e nte r o f th e

m a n : th e y

a r e

p e ri ph e ra l b olt-h ole s f ro m t ha t m o l te n c or e

o f fie rc e

s elf -

devot ion .

I n

th i s l igh t

i t

c om e s

as no

s u r p r is ethatTh e f o u n d m a s t u r b a t in g

a t

t h e s a m e t im e e xh i la r a t ing a nd d i s tr e s s ing . The im a g e o f h im s t a r ch i ly a nd

p a in f u l l yc o n fe s si n gh ist r a ns g r e ss ions , s om e m a jo r , s om erisibl ym i n o r ,in -

ten t ional lyw o un d in gh i sprid ew h i l e s im u l t an e o u s l yf u e l in git ,p e r f ec t l y

s u m sh im up . Th e id e a th a t h um o r m igh t p l a y a ro l e i n h o ld ing h i spridein

checkse em s

n o t t o

h a v e bee n

a

po ss ibi li ty

for

h im :

t o l e t

jok ey self-r idicule

in to th e in n e r te m p l e w a s m o re th a n hi spridec o ul d

ta ke to o

m u c h lik e

l a u g h i n g

i n

c h ur ch . W h e r e w o u l d

th e

n o b ilit y

o f

s e lf -a ba se m e n t

b e

th e n ?


24/273

W I T T G E N S T E I N :

M Y

W I C K E D

HE A R T 1 5

This

l if elo n g st ru g g l ew it hh i s

pride

too ka fo r m tha t o u g h tt ohav e

seemedt o h i m m or e do om e d th a ni td id .Hi sm e th o dw a st h a to fd ire c t

assau l t :

f ie rce se l f -scrut iny, merc i less se l f -con dem nat ion , exposure t o exper i -

ences calculated

to

chas ten

an d

h u m i li a te .

H e

approached

h i s o wn

soul like

a

k ind o fm ora l

engineer :

ther ew a s a f au l ti n th ed esig nan d i t ha d t o b e

dism ant led , t inke red wi th , r econs t ruc ted, poss ib l y s c rapped

altogether .

Gaz-

in g

i n w a rd , p o k i n g a ro u n d i n si de ,

w as the w ay to r id th e

sp i r i tua l mach ine

o f

it s imperfec t ions . Such di rec tnessofapproacht o aproblemw a squite alient o

his

a n n o u n c e d p h ilo so p h ic a l m e th o d :

fo r

ob l iquenes s

an d

in d ir ec tio n w er e

to b e th ee ss en c eo f p hi lo s o p h ic a l a dv a n c e m e n t .Th eobv iou s

fla w

i nth i s

app roach t o h imse l f wa s that i tinevitablyran th e ve r y r isk it was supposed t o

e l imina tethen a rc is sis ti c a bs o rp ti o n i n h i s o w n b ei n g t h a t sto o d b e tw e e n

h imse l f

a n d th eo u te r w o r ld . A n o t h e r m e th o d i f m e th o d

ther e

m u s t be

w o u l d

b e t o tr yt u r n i n ga

bored

e y e a n d e a ra w a y f rom

one's

ow ns o u lan d

t o w a r d th eliv e san d fe elin g so fo th ers , h o pin g th a t o ne ' sow nm o ra lim -

p r o v e m e n tw il lo cc u r w h i l eone is , a s i tw e re , o th e rw i s e e ng a g e d .

O ne o f th em o s t sh o c k in gan dr e v e a li n go fWi t tgens te in ' s r em ark s occur s

late

in hislife

w h e n

he is

reflect ing

on hi s

love

for Be n

Richards , w hich s t ruck

m e a s th e

m o s t o u tw a r d - d ir e ct e d a f f e c ti o n

of hi slife.I n hi s

la tef ift ie sn o w ,

he

w r i te s ,

a s

t h o u g h

th e

th o u gh t w e r e

n e w t o

h im :

" I t i s the

m a r k

o f a

true

loveth a t one th in k s of w hat the othersuffers .F o r h esuffe rstoo , is a lso a

poor

devil ."

W h a t a l arm s

hereis the

ve r y bana l i ty

of the

t ho u g h t ,

an d

in d e e d

on e

looks

i n

v a i n

fo r an y

s im i l a r se n t im e n t

i n hi s

e a rlie r r o m a n t i c a t ta c h m e n t s .

" Pe rh a ps t h e f l y ha d a t la s t f o u n d it s w a y o u t o f th e f ly -b o ttl e, " M o n k re -

m a r k s , t r e n c h a n t l y

a n drathe r

tr a g ic a ll y .

N o t

t ha t W i ttg en ste i n m an ag e d

even i n th i s c as e t o tr a ns la t e h i s s tr on g fe e li ng s i nt o a n o r d i n a r y ro m a n t i c

re la t ionsh ip w i ththey o u n g

m a n i n

q u e s ti o n .

T hi s b e a r s

o n th e

d i s p u te d q ue sti o n

o f

W i tt g e n s te i n ' s al le g e d p e ri o d

o f

h o m o s e x u a l p ro m i s c u it y ,

reported

by W il liamB artleyII I . In a

f inely

ju d g e d

a p p e n d i x M o n k a dd re s se s h i m s e l f to B a r t le y ' s cla im t h a t W i tt g e n s te i n u s e d

to avail him self

o f

th e se x u a l f a v o r s o f

"rough

y o u n g m e n " i n a c e rt ai n p a r k

inVien na , ca st ing cons ide rab le doub to n th ev e r a c it yofth is c la im.AsMo nk

argues , W i t tgens te in ' s obv ious d is com for t w i th h i s s exua l na tu re , he te ro - o r

h o m o s e x u a l, m a k e s t h e id e a o f s u c h f re e w h e e li n g p ro m i sc u i t y see m q u i t e

incredible .I t

w o u l d , m o re o v e r,

b e

ex t reme ly su rp r i s ing

if

such

act ivi t iesha d

been con f ine d to a sing le , shor t pe r io d o f h i slife,n e v e r t o re s u rf ac e . O f t en ,

in

the course of read ing abo u t W it tgens te in 's rom an t ic invo lvem ents , I fo un d

myse lfh e a r t i l y w i s h i ngth e h e h db e en h o m o s e x u al l y p r o m i s c u o u s .

That

w o u l d c e r t ai n l y ha ve ea se d t h e lo t o f th e

u n lu c k y

F r a n ci s S k in n e r ,

whose

love

for

W i t tgen s te in c lea r ly inc lud ed

a

des i re

fo r

s e x u a l c o n ta ct th a t

Wit tgens te in

a p p a r e n tl y

d i d h i s

bes t

t o a v o id t h o ug h ,

h a p p il y ,

h e w a s n o t

totally successfu li nth i s .O nes uc h" lapse "i sreportedi n Wit tgens te in ' s note-

books ,a n d i n c id e n t a ll y s ho wsR e d p a th t o b e w r o n g i n h i s b el ie f th a t t h er e

w asn o th in g m o r e "lu rid " b e tw e e n S ki nn e r

an d

W i tt ge n ste i n th a t

a

c lo s e

m a le f r ie n d s h i p . T h e tw o w e r e v a ca ti o ni n g to g et he r i n N o r w a y a n dW itt -


25/273

6

PHIL OSOP HICAL LIVES

genstein

r e p o rt s

h imse l f

a s

being "sensual , suscep tib le ,

i n d ec e nt "

wi th Skin -

n e r: "L a y w i t h

h i m tw o orthre e

tim e s . A l w a y s

at f irs t

w i t h

th e

f e elin g

tha t

t he r e w as

n o t h ing w r o n g

i n i t,

then w i th s h am e . H a v e als o b ee n u n j u s t , e d g y

a n d

in sin ce r e to w a rd s h im ,

an d

a ls o c rue l. "

Thes e

a r e

d i stu rb in g w o rd s

i n

m o r e

w ay s

than one . Wer e c rue lty

an d

lovelessnes s

h is

on ly po ssibler e sp o n se

to

a c tu a l h u m a n in ti m a c y ?

Did h i s

n e e d

fo r th e

a f fec t io n

o f

a n o th e r a lw a y s

havet o t u r nin t oa r e fu s a lo ri nc a p a ci t yt o la y hi s o w nh e ar to n th elin e ?

Myim p r es sio n i s

t ha t

s ex ua l p ro m i sc u it y w a s a bo u t th e la s t t hi n g W i tt -

gens t e in coul d

t o le r at e a n d

a ls o t ha t ethically i tw o u ld h av ebeenadef in i t e

step

i n th e

r i g h t d i re c ti on . U n f o r t u n a t e l y ,

h e

didn't

se e it

tha t wa y .

A

story

is

told tha ta close fr ien do f hi sonce sai do f h im tha t"h eneverha d agood

fu c k

in

h i sl ife . "I c an no t v ou c hfo r th e

t r u t h

o ft hi s s to r yb u t i ts eem st o m e

infinitely m or e

p robab le ,

an di n f in i te l ym or e

w o e f u l , t h a n

th e

id e a t ha t

h e

once indu lge da tas tefo r

rought ra d e .

I tm a r k sa r ea l l ac kin h isc o n c ep ti o n

o f th e s p ir it u a l

l if e

o f a h u m a n being , a swe l la s b ei n g s a d i n its e lf .

Thisi s of a p iece w i t h the s to r y tha t i s to ld , am us in g in i t s w ay , about th e

onefem al e lov eo f h i sl if e ,Marguerit e Respinger ,w ho mh e a t on etim e

wishedto

m a r ry a n d , w i t h

ap r o p o sa lin

m ind , i nv i te d

o n a

ho l iday wi th h im .

Sh et u r n e du p i n

re m ote s t N o r w a y

o n ly t o fin d

th a t

h e r

s u ito r' s id e a

o f a

p r e n u p t ia l v a c a ti o n

w a s

t ha t t he y s ho ul d

se e

ver y li tt l e

o f

eac ho th e r

an d

spendth e tw ow e e k sinp r a y e ran d m e d i ta t io n ,fo rw h ic h

p u r p o s e

W i tt ge n -

steinha dlef ta m a rk e d B ibl ei n th eroo mi nw h ic hsh e w a s t osta y .Sh e

d e c id e d , a m a z i n g ly , th at L u d w i g

w a s not th e m a n fo r

h er .

I n a n y

c a se ,

h i s

wishw a s fo r a

ch i ld l ess p l a ton i c

m a r ri ag e t h o u g h ,

o dd l y

e no u g h ,h e en -

jo y e d kis si n gh e r fo rh o ur so ne nd .

A n d w h a to f th ep h ilo so ph y ? M on k ha nd le s th i s ex pe rtly , se am le ss l y

weav ing i t i n to the na r ra t ive , show in g the in t ima t e re l a t ionsh ip be twe e n th e

ethicalc o nc e rn s o f W i tt g e n st e in ' s

lif e

a n d h i s p hi lo so p hic a l id e as .Therei s

m u c h i n te r e s t in g s c ho l ar l y m a t e ri a l a b ou t W i tt g e n st e in ' s r e a d i n ga n di nt el -

lec tual

i n f lu e n c e s ,

a n d ab ou t th e co m p os itio n o f h i s tw o m a jo r w o rk s . P er -

h a p s th e m o s t s tr ik in g it e m , f ro m a b io g r ap h ic a l p o in t o f

v ie w ,

i s W i t t g e n-

stein 's

la t e re m a r k : " N e a rl y a l l m y w r iti ng s a r e p ri va t e c o n ve rs a ti on s w i t h

mysel f .T hin g s th a tI s a y tom ysel f te te-a-te te ."Her ehi sper sona l so lip si s m

findsit sn a t u r a l c o u n t e r p a r t i n hi s p h il os o p hi ca l s ty le : a lw a y s a t u r n i n g in -

w a r d ,

a s if

on ly

h i s ow n

t h o u g h t s

a r e

u l t im a t e l y w o r th h ee d i n g .

A n d

t his ,

of

cou rse ,

ispa rtof the

s tr eng t h

an d

c h ar m

o f h i s

ph i lo soph ica l wr i t i ng ,

a nd o f

him a s aper sona l i ty :a ne n c lo s e d w o rl do fn u m b ere d p ar ag ra ph s , b ot hp o -

etic

an d

m a th e m a t ic a l , w h e r e

n o

a li e n vo ic e in t r u d e s .Ther e

i s

b e a u t y

b u t

also

d e s ol at io n i n t hi s id e a l .

I

began

b y

ask ing w he ther Wi t tgens t e i n

w a s a

sp i r itual gen ius .Thatq u e s -

tio n re all y ha s tw o pa rts : w a s h e th e sp ir itu all y su blim e in d iv id u al t h e

"sa in t"people

o fte n sai d

h ew as ?A n d d i d h e

k n o w how

t o b e

suc h

a n

i nd iv idua l ,

w h e t h er

o r not h e w as one

h im se l f ?

I

th ink

th e

a n s w e r m u s t

b e n o

to

bo th ques tions .

Hi s

va n i ty , emo t ional so l ips i sm ,

and

c o ld n e s s

p u t h i mw e l l

outs ideth ecategory

o f th e

s a i n t ;

a nd h i s

engine er ing

(o r

surgical)a p p r o a c h


26/273

W I T T G E N S T E I N : M Y

W I C K E D

H E A R T 1 7

to hi s sp i ri tu a l c o nd itio n se em s t o m e w r o n g l y c on c eiv e d , e m b o d y i n g a s i t

does

a deep

mis take

of

e thica l a t tent ion .

B u t a

b e t te r q u e st io n m i g h t

b e

this :

given

h i s n a tu re , d i d h e

liv e

a n o bl e an d e th ic a ll y d is ti ng u is he d

life ?

(H e

clearly l iv e d

a n

i m p r e ss iv e

an d

r em a r k ab l e o ne . )

Her e

I

t hi n k

w e

m u s t

d o

him

th e

c o u r t es y

o f

t a k in g

h i m a t h i s

w o r d

an d n o t

a ll o w

o ur

n a t u r a l s en ti -

menta l i t y

a b o u t

greatm e n t o g e t i n th e w a y of

h e ar in g w h a t

he

a ctu all y says

a b o u t h i m s e l f .

Of

M oo re ' s r e p u t a t io n

fo r

sa in t l y ch i ld l ike innocence , Wi t t -

g e n st ei n r e m a rk e d :

" I

can ' t un de rs tan d tha t , unle ss it 's a lso

to ach ild s

c red it .

F o r y o u

a re n ' t t al ki n g

o f th e

i nn oc en c e

a m a n ha s

f ou g h t fo r ,

bu t o f a n

i nn o c en c e w h i c h co m e s f ro m

a

n a t u r a l a b se n c e

o f

t e m p t a ti o n . "

I f w e

t ak e

seriously

W i t tgens te in ' s own

repeated

a s ses sm en t of h im se l f a s"rotten"an d

"indecent , " a s having a "wicked

hear t" in

w ha teve r w ay these ep i the t s w ere

m e a n t t h e n i t be c o m e s c le a r w h y h eregardedhi slifea s a m i g h ty s tr u gg l e

withh i m s e lf ,a ndw h a th e h a d t oove rcomet oachieveth em o r a l s t a n d i n ghe

d id . H i s pe c uli a r gr ea tn e s s c om e s fr o m t h a t a g on izin g ba ttl e be tw e e n h i s

n a t u r a l

h u b r i s

a n d th e

h u m i li t y

he

c raved , be tween

h i s

com puls ive devo t io n

tohimselfand hiswilledconcernfor

others.

The

s ingula r it y

of his

spiri tual

a ch ie ve m e nt c on sis t s i n th i s stra in e d a m a lg a m a tio n o f a gg re ssiv e m eg a -

l o m a n i aa n d ab je c t s e lf -m o r t if ic a ti o n . S om e h ow t h i s ba tt l e b r o u g h t so m e -

thin g spi r i tua l l y va luable in t o

th e

w o r l d t ha t

h a d n o t

beenthere

b e f o r e :

a n

abili ty,

w e

m i gh t say ,

t o

a t te n d re lig io u sl y

t o th e

fac e

o f

an o th e r h u m a n

b e i n g b u t

to do s o as if

this were

th e

s tr a n g e s t

a n d

mos t imposs ib le th ing

in

thew o rl dt oach ieve .


27/273

2

Wittgenstein:Soul on Fir e

Philosophical Occasions 19121951

b y

Ludwig Wittgenstein

editedbyJamesKlaggean d

AlfredNordman n

Hackett, 199 3

Wittgenstein:

The

Terry Eagleton Script

The

Derek

Jarman Film

by

Terry Eagleto nan dDere kJarman

Indiana Universit y Press, 199 3

Ludwig Wittgenstein

did

most

of his

publishing after

hi s

death,leaving that

sordid busines st o hisliterary executors.Th emodes t curriculu m vita e tha t

accumulateddurin ghi s

lifetimeone

shor t book , whic hwa s hisdoctora l

dissertation,onearticle,onebook reviewhasnow

expanded

to fifteensub-

stantial volumes .

And

ther e

i s

more

wher etha tcam e from . Wittgenstei n

would hardly haveflourished intoday's academic environment.Th egreates t

philosophero f thecentury would havehad to fight

hard

fortenure.Hi skind

of perfectionismi s nolonge rtolerated .

Not that Wittgenstein would himself have cared, give nhispropensityfo r

leaving th e professio n o f hi s own fre e will . It i s only th e worl d tha t woul d

have suffered.There

is a

characteristic poignancy,

in any

case,

in the

f ac ttha t

hisgrea tmatur e work , Philosophical

Investigations

shoul d hav ebee npub -

lishedtwoyears afterh edie din1951 ,thus sparin ghi m th eanguis ho f its

instant and

prolonge d

celebrity. So canonical is that work ,indeed, thatit is

hard

t o

believe

tha t

i t was

written

by

anyone.

I t

stands

ther e

like

a

natura l

monument,th eresul to fsuperlunary dictation .

Wittgenstein's philosophica l legac y consists principallyo f th ebinary sta r

formed b y the Tractatus

Logico-Philosophicus

whichappearedi n 1922 , an d

the Philosophical

Investigations

high-density object s givin g off complimen -

tary glows .Theview s expressedi nthesetwoworksaresharpl yopposedin

Reprinted

w it h

permissionf romt h e New Republic(June2 0 ,1994).

18


28/273

W I TTG E N S TE I N: SO U L

O N

F IR E

1 9

c o n t e n t

a n d i n

out look,

b u tthere

pers is ts

a

s i ng le u n de r l y i n g p re o c c u p a ti o n ,

a n d

th er e

a r e

co m m o n th read s . M or e th a n

a n y

p hilo so ph e r b efo r e h im ,

W i tt g e n st e in w a s c on c e rn ed w i t h t he l in k b e t w e e n l an g u a g e a n d r e a li ty . H e

w anted to unde rs tand how , by em i t ting sound s , we man age t o say som eth ing

abou t

th e

w o rl d b ey o n d la n g ua g e .

B y

w h a t m e c h a n i s m

o r

m e a n s d oe s la n -

guage ,a n dh en c e th o u g ht , c om et o b e m e a n i n g f u l?A ndw h a ta r e th e l imits

of

m e a n i n g ?

Wit tgens t e in ' sc o n t r ib u t i o n , pu t i n t h e bro ade s t t e rm s , i s t h at h e s a w h ow

difficultt hi s sim p l e q ue sti o nis .T alk in g ab ou t th in g si s ad e e pl y p u z zl in g

p h e n o m e n o n ,

n o t th e

t ra n s pa r en t

ac t o f

m i nd -w o rl d en ga ge m e n t th a t

w e

t end

t o

a s s u m e .

How

m u s t

the

w o r l d

be , and ho w

m u s t l a n g u a g e

be , for i t to

b e p o ss ib l e t h a t t h e tw o s h o u l d

jo i n

i n oc ca sio n s o f m e a n i n g ? W h a t c o n st i -

tu tes th i su n l i k el yn e x u s ?

In th e

Tractatus

th e

a n sw e r

w a s a

h i g h l y a b st ra c t m e t a p hy s ic a ls ys te m

but t ressed b y for m al logic , in

which

the s t ruc tu r e o f rea l ity and th e s t ruc tu r e

of

t ho u g h t w e r e d ed u ce d fr o m th e re qu ir em e n t s fo r a n y p ossib l e k in d o f

semanticrepresentation.Thisb ec am e k n o w n

as the

picture theory

of

m e an -

ing. "W hat any p ic ture , of w hate ver form, m us t have in comm on wi t h rea l ity,

in

order

t o b e

able

t o

de p i c t

i t correc tl yo rinco r rec t ly ina n y w a y at

a l l ,

is

logical

f o rm , i.e. , th e fo r m o f r ea li ty . "

That

is , fo r la n gu a g e t o d ep ic t th e

w orld , it is necessa ry for thes e two poles to share a n in ne r logica l s truc tur e, so

tha tf ac t san dp r o p os iti on s p a rt ak eo f th esa m e tr a n s c en d e n t lo gic a l o r d e r .

La n g u a g e a n d th ew o r l da r eo ne ,i nt h ei r

dee p

m e taphys ica l e s sence .

This

u l t ima te

m o n i sm

m ay not be

a p p a re n t

o n th e

su r face

of

l anguage ,

bu t it

m u st

b e s o b e n ea th th e su r f a ce ; a n d

ther e

m u s t e x is t a n i de a l l an g u a g e i n w h i c h

the

n e c e ss ar y s am e n e s s

o f

f o r m w i t h re alit y

i s

m a d e

fu ll y

tr a n sp a r en t .

T o

cons t ruc t suc ha l a n g u a g e w o u l dbe todeviseasym bolic systeminwhichth e

s t ru c t u r eo f t h ew o r l d w o u l d r ea c h ri g h t th r o u g ho u rm o de so fr e pr e se n ta -

t ion : a

flawless

me tap hys ica l m i r ro r,a s itwe re.Thepuzz le s p roducedb y o u r

i m p e r f e c t

o rd in ar y la ng ua g e w o ul d

b e fin all y

l ai d

t o

res t onc e

th e

idea l

l a n g u a g e

w a s

available.

A n d y e t W i tt g en s te i n d i d t h i n k th a t

there

i s a re sidue o f s ign i f icanc e no t

covered b ysuchana c co u n to fm e a n in g .F o rt h e r ea r e t h in g s t h a t c a n n o tb e

said,b u t

o n l y sh ow n ."Ther eare , in d ee d , th in g s th a t c an n o t

b e p u t

in t o

words . They make themselvesm anifest.The yar ew h a tism ystical ."

This

r e a l m

includes e thics , aes the t ics , phi loso ph y

i tself .

S tr ic t ly speak ing , u t t e rance s

o f

th ose k in d s

a r e

lite ra l n o n s e n s e , s in c e t he y ca n n o t

b e

b ro u g h t

unde r

th e

p ic tu re theoryo fmean ing ,bu t Wit tgens te inhas nodo u b t a b o u t t h ei r i m p o r -

t ance and the i r leg i timacy . The fam ou s la s t s en tenceo fth e

Tractatus

" W h a t

w e

c an no t sp ea k ab ou t w e m u s t pas s o ve r i n silence, " i s n o t in te nd e d t o

sugges ta dism issive at t i tu de tow ar dth eunsayab le .It re c o m m e n ds , i n s te a d ,a

reve rent ia l , a t tent iv e speechlessnes si n th efac eo f th etr an sc en d en t . W h a t

canno tb e p u ti n t o la n g ua g eca nsti l lb e

apprehended,

i nqu ie t ob liqueness .

The for m o f the m ys t ica l , u nl ike the for m of rea l i ty , is not any k ind o f logical

f o r m .

I t lie s o u ts ide t h e sp ac e o f po s si bl ef ac t .


29/273

20

PHILOSOPHICA L LIVE S

N o ne o f

t h i s s u rv i ve s

in

W i tt g en s te in ' s la te r w o r k .

I n

p lac e

o f

a b str ac t

d e d u c ti o n s ab o u t

th e

e s se n t ia l n a t u r e

o f

l a ng u a g e

an d th e

w o rld ,

w e

h a v e

m e t i cu l o u s o b s e rv a t io n s o f w h a t a c t u a ll y o cc u rs i n th e u s e o f l a n g u a g e ; a n

in tense dis t rus t of gen era l i ty ; an ins is tenc e on the i r red ucib l e m ul t ip l ic i ty of

o u r" l an g u a g e g a m e s " ;a nd th e i n t ro du c t i o nof thel iv ing h um an be in ga t the

rooto f w ha t m akes l anguage w ork .Therei s no longer an y such th ing a s

"the

g e n e ra l fo r m o f a p ro p o s it io n , " a n y m o re t h a n t h e r e i s a g e n e ra l es se n c e f o r

w h a t

w e ca ll a gam e; an d n o longe r i s it the func t io n o f a l l words to den o te a

c o n s t i t u e n t

o f rea l ity . The who l e no tion o f an idea l l anguag e i s r idd led w i th

error

a n dc o n f u s io n .Nop ic tu re , how ever a rcaneo r m e n t a lo rlogical , cou ld

ev er c o n fe r a m e a nin g . R ule s o f la n gu ag e , e ve n fo r m a th em a t ic a l te rm s ,

c a n n o t t a k e

a

g r ip

o n o u r

th o u g h t

a n d

co n d u c t i n d e p e n d e n t l y

o f o u r

b ein g

na tu ra l ly

p ro ne t o m ake pa r t i cu la r cho ices . O ur

just i f icat io ns

a lw a y srun

out,

a n d w e m u s t a c t w i th o u t a p p e a l t o fo u n d a t io n s .

W h a t i s b asic , i n th e la te r p h il os o ph y , a r e th e la n g u ag e g am e s th a t w e

actually p l a y , a n d th e "fo rm s o f life " in t o w h ic h th e y a r e w o v en . M e a n in g

m u s t

b e

s o u g h t

i n

t ho s eac t iv it ies ,

n o t i n a

h i d d e n

m e c h a n is m

o r a

s u bl im e

s tr u c tu r e . W h e r e o n c e m e a n in g s ee m e d cr ys ta llin e , u n i ta r y ,

a n d

rem ote ,

now i t i s

h u m d r u m , m u l ti fa ri ou s ,

an d

h u m a n l y m e d ia te d .

It s

s tu d y

i s no t

part

o f fo rm a l l og i c o r m e t a p h y s i c s , b ut o f h u m a n " n a t u r a l hi st o ry . "

This

is

thef o rc eo fW i t tgens t e in ' sce lebrated d ic tu mthatth em e a n in go f a ne x p r es -

sion i s revea led i n it s use: the re a r e n o p reex i s ten t m ean ing s on to whic h ou r

m inds m ag ica l ly l a t ch. Ra the r, ou rw ay so f behav ing w i th wo rds a re th e sol e

repos i tory

o f

s e m a n t i cs igni ficance .W i t t g e n st e i n

w as

fond

o f

q u o t in g

a

l in e

f rom

G o eth e :

"I n th e

b e g i n n in g

w a s thedeed."

W h a tl in k sW i t tgens te in ' s ph i losophies i s a

deep

a m b iv a le n c e a b o u t

lan-

guage .I n t h eea rl ie r wor k l anguagei s

cre dited

w i t ham arve lous inne r log ic ;

yet

i t i s

a lso he l d

t o b e

i n ade q u a t e

t o th e

e x p re ss io n

o f

som e

o f ou r

m o s t

p ro f o u n d c o n c e rn s . I t i s l ik e a p e r f e c t l y e n g i n ee r e d p r ec is io n to o l t h a t c a n

w o r k on lyw i thin severe l imi ts . Ev en the idea l langu age o f W it tgens te in ' s fi rst

ph i lo sophy canno t s a y w hat can on ly be show n. And i n the l at e r wor k we a re

told tha t "ph ilosoph y i s a ba t tl e aga ins t the bewi tchm en t o f ou r in te l ligenc e

bym e an s

o f

l an g u ag e , " t h o u g h e ls ew h e r e

w e ar e

as su re d th a t " p hi lo s op h y

m ay

in no way in te rfere w i t h the ac tua l use of languag e; i t can in the end onl y

descr ibe

it."

On th e on e

h a n d , o r d in a r y la n gu a g e

i s

held

t o b e

p e r f e c tl y

i n

orderas it is, not

n e e d i n g r e f o rm

o r

c e n s u re

o n

ph i losophica l g round s

a lo n e .

O n th e

o th e r h a nd ,

i t i ssupposedt og iv e r is et oi n tr a c ta b l e c o n f u s i o n ,be -

cause of the m is leadin g ana logies i t sugges ts, and becau s e i ts gr am m arfa il st o

ref lec tth eac tua luse ofwords . Language encourage su s tota lk no nsense ,bu t

it i s n o t le s s t h a n i dea l b ec a us e o f it . I t i sl ikea p e r fe c tl y

a d a p te d

o rg a n is m

tha th a s a r eg ret ta b l e te n de n c yt o t u r no n it so w n er .

Moreov er , langua g e ha s i ts l im i ts, in the ear ly W it tgens te in an d th e la te , as

a f o u n d a ti o n

fo r

th ou gh t

an d

a ctio n , sin c e

i t

res t s u p o n so m e th in g

non-

l inguis t icinn a t u r e .Th el e ar n e ro fl a n g u a g eneeds moret h a n v e rb a l e xp l a -

na t ion i f he i s to l at ch on to w ha t is m ean t, sinc e no w or d i s s e lf -in terp re ting ;


30/273

W I T TG E N S T E IN : SO U LO N F IR E2 1

theteacher mus t relyon the

learner's

takinghisinstructionsin a

certain

way

and

acting appropriately.

Fo r the

same reason,

th e

analysis

of one

sentenc e

bymeans

of

anothersentence canno t escap e

the

circle

of

signs,

and th e

slack

must

be

taken

u p by

modes

o f

natural response tha t resist codification. Lan-

guage

is

possible only because

i t is not

self-reliant , because

i t is

parasitic

on a

foundationofnonlinguistic abilitiesanddispositions .Inthi s

sensehere

we

see theghos to f the

Tractatus

languagecanno t communicat eit s ownpre -

suppositions.

Thisambivalence about

th e

power s

of

language reveal s itself

in

Wittgen-

stein'sproses ty le .

Ther e

isgreat

confidence

in th e

expressive capacitie s

of

language, even

the

pared-down, monosyllabi c vernacular that

hepreferred ;

but hi s style is also halting and allusive , discontinuous and metaphorical . H e

w r i t e s

as if he isdeterminednot to askmoreof language tha n i t can deliver ,

not togivethe

reader

theillusion that thingsar ecleareran dstraighter tha n

they

really are. Certainl y

his

prose

requiresthe

utmos t scrutiny,

as

well

as an

ab i l i ty

t o

engag e creativel y with wha t

i s

being said .

An d i t

strive s

fo r a n

intellectual effec tthat goesbeyonddiscursive formulationt o

alter one's

"way

of seeing." "Say whatyouchoose,"hesaysat onepoint,"solongas itdoesnot

prevent

you

from seeing

the

facts." This

can

sound odd , coming from some -

one who ceaselessly reminds philosopher s o f their perilous tendenc y to mis-

uselanguage;bu t it fits the

deeper

aim ofcuring distortionsofvision caused

b ylanguage itself .

For al l his

obsession wit h language, Wittgenstein' s hear t

w asnot exactly

there.

He was as much concernedw it hwhat language cannot

do a s with what it can.

In Philosophical

Occasions James

Klagg e an d Alfre d Nordman n hav e

u s e f u l l y

an ds k i ll fu ll y

assemble d variou s writings

by

Wittgenstein tha t have

been scattered

and

hard

t o

obtain.

The

variety

is

such

as to

permit

a

synoptic

v iew of hisseveral concernsfrom comment sonFrazer' sTheGoldenRough

to piece s o n ethics , sense-data , caus e an d

e ffe ct ,

fre e

w ill ,

th e natur e o f

philosophy.Ther eareals o some revealing lettersan d a ninformativ e essay

b y

Henri kvo nWrigh to n th ewriting s that Wittgenstei n le f t

behind .

Th e

book

i s an

excellent source,

and i t

provides

a

nourishing supplemen t

t o th e

Investigations.

Particularly interestin gar e th eremark so n th enatur eo fphilosophy ,

w h i c hexpand

illuminatingly on themes pursued i n the

Investigations.

Philo-

sophy,

fo r Wittgenstein , is not t o b e conceive d i n th e traditiona l wa y as a

maximally

general science , so that the task of the philosopher i s to develop an

entirelyuniversa l theory o f reality . Instead , philosophica l wor k consist s in

dismantling confusions and mythologie s by paying careful attentio n t o ou r

ordinary concepts , resistin g

th e

fals e analogies suggeste d

b y our

form s

o f

expression.

Th e

problem s

ar e

d i ff i c u l t ,

no t

because the y concern especiall y

deep

features of reality, butrathe rbecause it ishardfor us to obtain a clear

v iew o f wha t we already kno w very well . Philosophy, orth esearc h fo r th e

ultimate theory, i s over, bu t philosophizin g mus t go on.

"Philosophical problem s

ca n be

compared

to

locks

on

safes , which

can be


31/273

22PHILOSOPHICA LLIVE S

opened

b y

d ia l ing

a

c e rta in w or d

o r

n u m b e r ,

s o

that

n o

fo rc e

ca nopenth e

dooru nt i l ju st th is w ord

ha s

been

hi t

u p o n ,

an d

o nc e

i t is hit

u p o n

an y

chil d

can open i t. "Therei sno th ing in t r ins ica ll y profound abou tth er igh t c om bi -

na t ion ,

no r

a bo u t

th e

resul t

i t

secu res;

th e

dif f icul ty

l ie s pu rely

in the

t ro u b l e

w e

h a ve i n h i tt in g upo n th e a ns w e r , i n se e ing w h a t i s be fo re ou r e yes .This

has theconsequence tha tth ew o r k in g sof o url a n gu a g ea r e a sop aquet o us as

a

secre t code , e ve n

a s

t he r e

i s

n o th in g hid de n

o r

reco nd it e ab ou t thes e

w orkings . Wefailto grasp the t ru th abo u t our languag e precise l y because i t is

so

f am i lia r t o u s . T h e p h ilo so p he r m u s t a pp ro a c h hi s ow n m a s te r y o f la n -

g u a ge lik e

a n

a n t h ro p o lo g is t , s tr iv i n g

to se e i t

a f re s h . A l i e na ti o n

i s

sou n d

m e th od .

Wittgens te in ' s

i n f lue nc e ,

for

good

o r

i ll ,

has

b e en c o n t in u o u s

an d

u n pa r -

a l le led . Som eth ing o f h i s own es t im ate of the n a tur e o f th i s in f luence can b e

g le a ne d f r o m th e l a p id a r y p r e fa c e t o t h eInvestigations w here h e say s of th e

" re m a r ks " t ha t co m p o s e t ha t "a lb u m " :" Im a k e th e m p ub li c w it h d o u b tf u l

feel ings .I t i s n ot

im poss ib l e t h a t

i t

s h ou ld

fa l lt o th e lo t o f

t hi s w o r k ,

in i t s

pover ty

an d i n th e

d ar kn e s s

o f

th i s tim e ,

t o

b r in g lig h t in t o

o n e

b ra i n

o r

an othe r bu t , of course , i t is not l ikely." The pess imis m hereis not th e resul t

of

f ee li n g th a th ew il lb ei gno re do ru n d e r a p p re c i at e d , sin c eh egoe so n t o

a d m it t ha t f ea r

o f

p la g i a ri s m

w a s a

m a jo r s tim u l u s

t o

pub li c at ion :

" I w a s

o blig ed t o le ar n th a t m y re su lt s (w h ic h I h a d co m m u n ic ate d i n le ctu re s ,

typescr ip tsa nd d i s c uss ions ) , va rious ly m i sund e r s tood, m or e o r le s s m a ng le d

o r w a te r e d - d ow n , w e r e i n c i r c u la t ion .Thiss tu n g m yvani tya n d I h a dd iffi -

cul ty

i n

q u i e t in g it. "

I t i s

w o r th as k in g w h e th e r t he s e p re s e n ti m e n t s a p p l y

alsoto h is

p os thu m ous r everbera t ions .

Ho w

m uc h m a ng l ing

an d

d i lu t in g

ha s

t he re be e n ? M o r e

t o th e

p o in t ,

ho w

m u c h p ro je c ti o n

a n d

a s s im i l at io n

ha s

th er e be en ?

F o r i t

takes

two to

in f lue nc e ;

and i n the

c as e

of

W i t tgens te in

th e

inf luenceten d s to be more o f a m ixing than a po ur in g. Clou dines s is apt to be

th eu p s h o t .

From th em o m en th est eppe d in t o ph i lo s oph y , f r omth eno t - so-ad jacen t

field

o fe ng ine e r ing , W i ttge nst ei n

ha d a n

im p a c t

o f

e x t r a o rd ina r ypropor -

t ions. Fro m th e f i rst hethr i l ledB e r t ra n dRussel l ,nolaggerin theh ea d a re a ,

with

hi s

in tens i ty

and hi s

br i l liance , leading Russel l

to

procla im

h i m t h e

n ex t

greathopein phi loso phy . Later W it tgens te in ' s cr i tic isms so w ithered Russel l

intel lectual ly

that

h e

m o r e

o r

les sgave

up th e

k i n d

o f

ph i losophy

of

wh ich

he

w as

a

m a i n a rc h it ec t , t u r n in g in ste a d

t o

les sth e o re ti ca l m a t t e rs . (Rus se l l

eventua l ly

t u r ne d a ga ins t W i t tge ns t e in ' s m a tu re st yl e

of

ph i lo s oph y , d e c l a r-

in gh i m t o ha v e g iv e n u p se rio u s th in k in g . ) I n V ie n n a i n th e 1930s , th e

logical

pos it iv i st s

fo un d

th e

ra tio n a l e

fo r

the i r

o w n

sc ient is t i c ideology

i n

Wit tgens t e in ' sTractatus and the i r teach ings w ent on to dom ina te ph i losoph y

fo ra l am enta bly ex tended

p e ri od t h o u g h

they gro tesque ly mis represen te d

the

c o n te n t

o f

th a t w or k , no t a b ly

in

r espec t

t o i t s

p rofessed m ys t ic i sm . Th is

aspec t o f th e

Tractatus

w as

tota l ly ant i thet ica l

to

t h ei r

ow n

o u t lo o k .

Instal leda t

C a m b r id g e

i n th e

th i rt i e s , W i t tgens te in do m ina ted

th e

s ce ne ,

f o u n d i n ga ne w s ty le of ph ilo s oph y a nd c om bin in g t o r m e n t a n d i n souc ia nc e

269539148 Philosophy of Mind

Documents