7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
1/273
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
2/273
M I N D S
n
BODIES
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
7/273
his page intentionally left blank
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
10/273
M I N D S
n
BODIES
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
11/273
his page intentionally left blank
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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-
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 .
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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.
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
17/273
his page intentionally left blank
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
18/273
I
PHILOSOPHICALLIVES
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
19/273
his page intentionally left blank
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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).
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 -
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 ?
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 -
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 .
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 .
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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 ;
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7/23/2019 269539148 Philosophy of Mind
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
7