"He inherited a lot of money" has to be the understatement of the century. He inherited the largest fortune in Austria and of the largest in Europe. He was rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams.
@@Ianbolton We are not sure. I was imparted in college by 2 masters of Ludwig's philosophy in a very refreshing and trailblazing style. Actually, I was imparted by one of them, the other I also knew, but was the mentor of the second, which is the one who taught me. I once asked him about this and his opinion was that it was probably mostly a result of Witt's own mild eccentricity, I suppose it's the same one that made him design one of his sister's houses so obsessively down to the milimeter. We will never know all the reasons.
until you found out that he didn't use the money at all, and living in the poor condition, volunteer to war, being school teacher, and live depressed life.
He attended the same grammar school as Hitler. There's a school picture of them with three boys between them. The greatest philosopher and greatest tyrant in the 20th century 4 feet from each other.
Inasmuch as you are able to express it to others. But that is all and you will never be able to express it properly. The experience of the world happens before words are formed.
Nope. They're only the limits of your understanding of the world. 'Your world' in a sense I suppose, but never so rigid that it can't expand. It's like claiming that the limits of your world is the limitation of your conscious mind, which isn't true. The unconscious always has more to offer. That this process is itself a process and not something instantaneous is, I guess, the only limitation of it that we can claim in truth: that we're always cognizant of an expanding boundary, rather than knowing everything all at once and so, in language, the 'right' words for them.
***** can you please put a lnks in the video of the book(s) that are mention in it. also in future videos can you make that please?. thank you for this channel.
''... nothing is lost. The inexpressible is rather - inexpressibly - contained in the expressed ...'' Wittgenstein : Then we can get your excitement through these words my friend ... :)
I think this missed Wittgenstein's central point that the meaning of a word is its use in language. If I say "pick up the red apple," you know what I mean because the language is functional. If I say "what is the soul?" then we have philosophical problem on our hands. Wittgenstein believed that such questions were nonsense. Our approach to understanding the physical world consists in asking questions about the nature of phenomenon and we encounter. A questions like, what is red?, can be answered somewhat satisfactorily by giving an account of radiation, wavelengths, the way our eyes function and so forth. We seem to be able to give an explanation. When we apply similar questions to more abstract objects or concepts or to more fundamental phenomenon we find that no good explanation can be given. We have reached the limits of language. Yet philosophers try to reach further by creating grand theoretical frameworks aimed at somehow accessing reality as it really is. The misapplication of questions was something Wittgenstein called the theoretical attitude. When asking such a question we want the answer to give some new insight into the object. The best we can do is to give an account of how the word is used in the language, an ostensive definition. We want something deeper but you simply cannot go beneath language. This view either does away with Platonism (the assertion that abstract objects and concepts like numbers and goodness exist independently of the human mind) or shows that language is limited in its ability to describe the platonic realm. Therefore Wittgenstein's philosophy dissolves much of philosophy by declaring the questions nonsense.
+spetsnaz5 Wouldn't that argument stem from the Tractatus only? Yes, as you say, key is that the meaning of words is in there use. But couldn't we, for example, have a conversation about what the "soul" is and come to a meaningful conclusion based on what we believe, think and feel; and have the establishment of the meaning of the term prove useful. Say, as a referent to the unknown or alleviating angst about it. Isn't the mistake to reify something, and think that we could get to know it better, simply because a word exists for it and, therefore, confuse reality with the terms that we have to describe it? I think that is the error with the Tractatus which is relieved in Philosophical Investigations.
+steelonius Yes words do have meaning and are useful, but only within their particular language game. If I started using the vocabulary of Christian theology and you were not well versed in this “language game” then my language would have no meaning for you. Even common words have different meanings depending on the context of their use; the theological meaning of love is different than what you would find in a chick flick. When you ask if we could narrow our definition of the soul to make it more useful I am sure we could. Philosophers do that kind of thing all the time. I think of this as part of the philosophical language game. Philosophers tend to have definitions of common English words that are more precise than their common definitions. This allows for clearer discussion and reasoning. However, if you ask a layperson to read some of these philosophical writings, without letting them read the portion of the text where terms are defined, it may take them a while to adjust their understanding of the words being used. This indicates that the words have been removed from their common use, and are now jargon in a particular academic language game. It follows that any insight gained by this sort of pursuit is similar to proving something within a formal system of your own devising. The insights don’t map back onto to the common uses of the words in question. It might be intellectually challenging but it’s not making the progress it appears to make at first blush. In Philosophical Investigations, part of what Wittgenstein is encouraging is that we look at words the way they are ordinarily used instead of participating in the philosophical language game. But I still find there is a lot of beauty to be found in intellectual language games. There is beauty in their intricacy and they often seem to be finer instruments for discussing various parts of life.
+Philip Blankenau Every field of learning has its own special words or jargon - e.g. biology, chemistry, physics, ballet, cookery. These are necessary and we just have to take time to learn their definitions
*Spetsnaz5* I think Wittgenstein was right in some ways, but dead wrong in others. We need better language that transcends the limitations of our current languages. We need to purposefully CREATE a new KIND of language. We did it with math, I see no reason we couldn't come up with something better for metaphysics than "picture-prompts in random games".
Wittgenstein would have loved today’s memes culture... which basically confirms his thoughts... a meme succinctly expresses what words cannot... he was ahead of his time..a man of the digital age.....
@@ritam8767 in every joke, there is always some truth in it... that’s why we laugh... because we recognise the truth.. memes use truth as a way of making us laugh... they are our subconscious
@@franceleeparis37 i find that to be true. people find amusement in memes about their mental state and sanity and comfort that some other being feels this way. it is also a convenient and humorous way to show ethical differences between two subjects.
Favorite Wittgenstein Quotations: If a lion could speak, I would not be able to understand him. A dog can expect his master, but he cannot expect him on Tuesday. All problems of philosophy are problems of language. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof must one remain silent.
Because dogs have no conception of language, and don't understand that one day we call Tuesday and another Monday and another Friday and so on. So, if it is Tuesday, and my dog expects me, then I can say my dog expects me and it is Tuesday, but I cannot say my dog expects me on Tuesday, because it's misleading. The doesn't know it is Tuesday, so he's really no expecting me on Tuesday; he's just expecting, and it just so happens to be Tuesday.
Hardly. The quotation comes from the start of a longer dialogue about the uniqueness and usefulness of language as a means to convey information, meaning, and intentions to another sentient being. Many other philosophers have built upon his work to talk about the possibility of alien logic. That is to say, an alien species whose logic, norms, and customs vary so greatly from our own that they would not be able to communicate with us in any meaningful way. Is such a species possible? That's difficult to say, as we've yet to encounter an alien intelligence, but the notion is nonetheless an interesting though to consider. In practical terms, the quotation is also useful as a way to realize that humans communicate with one another quite well, but with other species our communication is limited by the fact that we typically prefer verbal or written communication, whereas even other Earth-bound species communicate in ways that are distinct and to some extent foreign to us. More foreign even than English is say to someone who speaks only Chinese or Basque, or any other non-Indo-European language.
Isn't the point even bigger, namely that if a lion could speak YOUR language you still could not understand it? It's 'inner world' would be quite alien even if the words sounded the same!
This channel feels like a catalouge where you can have some preinformation about philosophers and their interests, so you can pick one and start reading them !
1:47 - 2:04 I just love how we're given a visual representation of a concept that describes how the very exchange of language and ideas is processed as internal visual imagery of the mind.
I've actually thought about these exact ideas a lot myself without knowing if there was a philosopher I could look to for more. This is really interesting.
My continued efforts to build my vocabulary are for this exact reason: I’m always trying to find better ways and words to express myself, so I can show others what I truly mean, in attempts to build deeper and stronger connections.
The problem is it's a two way street. You can expand your vocabulary all you want, but if the listening party can't interpret & decipher your meaning in the way you intend, it's still all lost.
Don't have the ability to Express my ideas and thoughts properly to others is my biggest problem that can't be solved, and when I thought I'm the only person who have that problem this video came out of nowhere to me. Wittgenstein is my bro👊
Thank you so much for popularizing and democratizing philosophy. Alain, we are a big fan of you in Bangladesh. We sincerely express our gratitude to you for making these type quality materials available to us. As a result of CZcams community, knowledge is no longer a privilege of the wealthy few. Let the wisdom of philosophy be there for all to share....spread even to the poorest hut of Bangladesh. -Love from Khulna, Bangladesh.
It's 2021. I'm a philosopher major and have just read thru many lecture slides, hardly understanding what Wittgenstein meant in his early and then late work. The "about face" he took on his stance in language. Watching this video, helped me understand it. Thank you so much.
Since the video explains some basic threads of his personal life, it really should be mentioned he served for years as an officer in World War I, winning valor awards, being imprisoned - and writing much of Tractatus in the process. It is unlikely that such an experience did not affect his character and ideas at least as much as the other personal details covered.
He started as a front soldier and finished the war as Lieutenant. It was the greatest progression through the ranks in ALL of the Austro-Hungarian army. This guy was the definition of overachiever. Whatever he decided to do, he frickin aced it.
@@Ardakapalasan Apart from his school teacher years. Sorrow mostly marks that out. But what it would have been to have been a student of his. His spritual side seems to have been secularised..
Him being autistic (identified after his death, more recently with new knowledge on autism and how it presents) should also be mentioned as that is the foundation to all of his thoughts & work.
@@spacefertilizer i think later Wittgenstein might agree memes are better than words because sometimes they can be more precise in a practical sense, but earlier Wittgenstein or Russell might disagree because memes are hard to form a logical system to carry out accurate message logically where natural language has more potential
This is not a very good summary of the Tractatus. A quote from Wittgenstein's Introduction to the Tractatus (a title which Wittgenstein himself did not like and did not use when later speaking of the work) will give you more information than this video: "The book deals with the problems of philosophy and shows, as I believe, that the method of formulating these problems rests on the misunderstanding of the logic of our language. Its whole meaning could be summed up somewhat as follows: What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent." He is most definitely not promoting a theory of communication or a theory of any sort. You will not find the word "theory" anywhere in the work except when talking about other philosopher's theories or when he is explicitly stating that philosophy and logic are not theories: "Philosophy is not a theory but an activity." (4.112) "Logic is not a theory but a reflexion of the world." (6.13) Understanding the fact that he is not proposing a theory and is, in fact, chiefly trying to show why proposing a theory does not make sense in philosophy and logic is fundamental to understanding the Tractatus. The book is about understanding the logic of language. He is trying to show that the way that philosophers formulate traditional philosophical problems is confused because they misunderstand the logic of language. He wanted the book to help philosophers come to an understanding of the logic of language. And he believed at the time of the writing of the Tractatus that if one comes to understand the logic of language, all of the major problems of philosophy are dissolved. I appreciate the efforts of those who want to make Wittgenstein accessible to a larger population. And to the extent these efforts lead one to actually pick up a text and study it for oneself it is a worthy project. But I offer this summary of what Wittgenstein said to a group of students in an Introduction to Philosophy Course: "I can't teach you anything that I know without your having to work just as hard as I did to learn it."
Patrick Horn I did have to work hard to read Philosophical Investigations with some degree of understanding. It was rough going. I might study one paragraph for a whole evening, and be glad if I could figure out what he was talking about.
I really appreciate the kind of subject matter Wittgenstein tackles here regarding language and misinterpretation. Communication can go wrong so damn often. People interpret simple compliments and offers to help as having sinister motives or double meanings, granted because they've been manipulated by language before, but they no longer associate these phrases with their true meaning. Comedy is in danger of censorship because people never understand the intent of jokes. People have become so judgmental and paranoid because they are so afraid of being manipulated or being taken as a fool, that they develop trust issues which interfere with their ability to make friends and thrive socially. In a situation like this, both sides need to take some form of responsibility. The speaker has to be more precise and clear when discussing his/her idea and the listener has to be more open-minded and considerate of the speaker; giving them the benefit of the doubt in order to uncover their true intention.
These videos are absolutely excellent - the writing is entirely lucid, the visuals are compelling and extremely well constructed, and the voice is completely perfect for the material. Some of the ancient presocratic philosophers could be very interesting for future topics!
The school of life is like reading a tabloid news paper, nice pictures, easily understood, but skewed to fit with time/space, and a dumbed down narrative. Not at all accurate or complex enough in this case.
Thanks to Wittgenstein, we had the linguistic turn in the philosophy. A lot of philosophical problems exist because we don't understand our language. Some philosophers and linguists might even say that philosophy is dead and everything that was a philosophical thing is now a linguistic thing or a science thing.
This is a phenomenal channel. Spending (not wasting) hours catching up on things learned in the past and learning things I never bothered or was offered to learn. Keep great lessons coming.
He was terribly neurotic and very wealthy. But he tried... to help. That counts. And yes, language is at the core of our ability to think. Then again, "thinking" may be overrated. Feeling / thinking has gotten us all the way up to HERE. July 2019 AD. You are a witness... to the ongoing world.
Possibly part of the reason for his stuttering is the neurobiological issue that ran in his family. There's a link between stuttering and bipolar disorder.
“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.” When I think of Wittgenstein, I mostly think of the line from the ending of Hamlet: "the rest is silence," effectively sounding the death knell for metaphysics.
While this is a nice sort of "everyday" interpretation of Wittgenstein's work, I think it sort of misses the point. The Tractatus was meant to show how issues in philosophy arise from misunderstanding language. One of the examples he gives is the idea of the "soul". To have any sort of discussion of the soul, there needs to be a clear understanding of what the soul is. If a clear definition cannot be made, the aim should not be to try to answer the question but rather show that the question is incoherent. His aim was to show how "problems" in philosophy are not questions that need to be answered, but that one should show that the problem does not exist in the first place.
Words are weak, there are too many words in the world from over 6000 languages, yet still these words cannot describe everything, it cannot even describe the taste of pasta I had tonight
@@mrbubbles69able I always get them mixed up as well, then I remember this wee rhyme our granny taught us: The one from Get Him To The Greek Was Russell Brand, the sexy freak The philosopher with logic and muscle Was the Welsh Nobel laureate, Bertrand Russell
Vocabulary is a gift to mankind. To put a label on things that you don't even how to describe like a weird commotion in your head. Well books made me realise that everyone goes through this.
i love this channel so so so much. you guys are my heroes. you make such wonderfully edited, visually appealing, and thought provoking videos. each video i've seen is honestly a masterpiece. you can explain philosophical thought in such a relatable and palatable way. thank you for your wisdom. i truly think you guys are making the world a better place and helping people with daily struggles. i wish you the best of luck!
Hear hear Alain in my humble opinion is right up there with David attenborough no wait he far surpasses him, such a unique and recognizable voice .... and the content is pure gold
How strange! This was an observation - that words sort of form pictures in the mind - I made a couple of years back. I thought it was just a form of learning that I had adopted, but when I tested the idea on friends the looked at me like I was wonky. They didn't understand why I immediately formed visuals in my head as I consumed or produced words. Yet a great philosopher has already written extensively on this idea and I'm so glad to have found this video. I must find this book and read it.
From the first, Wittgenstein was my personal favorite. I guess because we cannot really get anywhere with 'any' communication without first it. Even still, it can never be the same.
What I enjoy most about Wittgenstein is that he was very concrete. Too many philosophers immersed themselves into symbolism; an art that is frequently misinterpreted; also an art where every author swears to have the code "unlocked".
I just want to mention that the Wittgenstein family was even wealthier that you might think. When Wittgenstein was born, his father was far and way one of the richest men in all of Europe; this is no joke. No other philosopher on this list (I've watched them all) was as rich as he originally was.
@@darlenethompson6791 Analytic referes to anything derivable purely from the definition, if you say 2+2=4, then 2+2+2=4+2=6 that is an analytical argument, another one is all bachelors are unmarried men, which doesn't say anything new while using a definition, but a synthetic argument, would be to bring new knowledge into a definition, such as John is a bachelor, therefore he is unmarried, this is because no where in the definition of Bachelor is John present.
I think the limitations of language and our ability to accurately use it to represent ideas, feelings, thoughts, is the crux of the majority of conflict presented in our species and the world we live in.
I'm going to go develop a language that offers intrinsic coding to the game being played with the idea being conveyed, and I strongly feel I should figure out how to work math into it as well, so I'll be gone a bit. Don't wait up for me.
Here's a suggestion: If you want this language to utilize category theory and conceptual mathematics to the highest degree by acknowledging both the object-oriented and process-relational approach to reality, I recommend you emulate Chomsky's Hierarchy.
"...offers intrinsic coding to the game being played with the idea being conveyed, and I strongly feel I should figure out how to work math into it as well..." If you're serious about this I've a silver bullet for you. Philosophical individuation, as a process, is exactly the same as the method through which Surreal Numbers were invented/discovered. PI just happens to be the process through which literally every THING is created - no exceptions. I'm available for comment if you're actually trying to do this but it gets very...personally destructive the further you go.
Thank you very much for this timely video! I have been having the same struggles of Wittingenstein since high school. I have only realised just how much information is lost in translation the past two years. It has brought me peace instead of anxiety whenever there is silence between a colleague and I. Most of my social awkwardness was generated by me guessing and over reading any signals and ignoring the blatant ones. I'm so happy to see that I am not the only one who faced the same issues and found similar answers! :)
"Went to live in Spartan solitude in Norway. Then he started writing the Tractatus". That's not how it happened. He volunteered to serve as front soldier in World War I (during which he was wounded and decorated many times) and wrote the book while in the trenches. His father died after the war and that's when he inherited the fortune.
This served as a great introduction to Wittgenstein for me. I have come back and rewatched this and shown it to many others. Like any media it is a particular perspective on, in this case, the work of Wittgenstein. If Wittengetin was focused on logic and understanding well this is a particular perspective of that focus - and to me it appears to end on a rather optimistic note. It does not seem as if logic or understanding concern optimism at all really. It appears that the closest Wittgenstein comes to this in his efforts was to say one must "pull up the ladder" so to speak, or that words, and therefore understanding can only go so far - then there is nothing left to do but to be silent. If you follow understanding to its logical end then there is nothing to be said. "Letting the fly out of the fly bottle" is an optimistic way of balancing this idea - and it is nice to consider in closing. Again - I think this is a great intro but the rabbit hole - it goes so far and then - even then, at its greatest depth, there are no answers to be spoken.
Great video as always, but I was looking forward to hearing a tad about Wittgenstein's 1929 Lecture on Ethics for it is in my opinion, a 'little' piece of his mind that truly transcends his own thoughts and elevates them to this pragmatically beautiful new perspective..
I highly recommend watching Derek Jarman's film about this philosopher, aptly titled "Wittgenstein". It's just as didactic and enjoyable as this video.
I've been waiting for this one you beautiful people. And Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus is pure genius anyone who finds this interesting should read it, it's not an easy read but it's relatively short and if you can understand it and all and get through it's a beautiful and mind blowing and incredible book.
***** fair enough, I'd assume it would be more minor points than the over all message though cos there certainly are several flaws in the argument though it seems to me that it reaches a good conclusion. And the north of England, off to uni next year.
***** Wittgenstein himself did do the translation and considering his whole idea is that misinterpretation of language is problematic I'm fairly confident that the translation he would have done would have accurately represented what he was trying to say.
I think it shows the genius of his work that he was the first to see language games. A generation later, Transactional Analysis became the coffee-table book of choice for the pseuds...
My sir Ludwig Wittgenstein is not there but his thinking is alive into every human's brain! And that is about language and which is the same as thinking! ❤️🙏
Is this a reference to something? Perhaps his text? This statement seems to be carefully constructed so as to be as ambiguous as possible. Possibly to demonstrate a point on mental pictures in communication? :)
The seminal work on human's inability to communicate with one another is Martin Buber's "I and Thou." Buber asserts that we live our lives "in monologue," that we automatically frame what they say as to how it pertains to ourselves rather than the person telling us.
When I see bright yellow thumbnail on my CZcams homepage, a little more attention is diverted to what I'm seeing! At last, 'Philosophy'! I was introduced to Ludwig's theory while I was doing an assignment on the famous 'Brain In A Vat' theory when I read that Wittgenstein rejected the theory on the basis that it does not change as to how we view things or a simple 'So What?'. Seen glimpses till know, next year is reserved for reading his works. Wonderful thinker.
Wow. I think this video needs a warning - it has very little to do with Wittgenstein! The story of his life is reasonable accurate, but the account of what he was trying to do overall plus the account of the Tractatus and the account of the Investigations are wildly inaccurate. The Tractatus is not about how we try to recreate pictures in other people's mind - it explores the conundrum of how language can be used to convey meaning. The Investigations are not about noticing that language is not just about stating facts; rather it is about how we misunderstand the relationship between the Inner and the Outer and the role of language in allowing ourselves to express ourselves. But there you go :-)
Thank you Paul. You're a hero. I too have felt that school of life, often and without taking responsibility, misses the main point around some topics. But then again, I also cannot help but think that my interest in philosophy and degree can be credited to this channel. So in the end, we need mass media to add glamour to philosophy in order to make it relatable and applicable to times. However, we do need people like you who can always show my fly the way out of the fly bottle. :)
I have "Apantashia", which is diagnosed so lately, 2015, is a neurologic statement that one cannot see in their mind's eye. So when I learned that, I also realize that I'm not thinking with pictures which is so primitive but instead I'm thinking with words. I know what Wittgenstein mean by that, words are symbolizations of the sensations one've got so it leads to communication problems. But I wanted to underline that maybe not everybody has to ability to think the way we assume they are. This is also, I think, a possible philosophical question too.
I have big trouble trying to study if I don't have an interesting environment. The visual and clear voice made it very easy for me to understand enough of philosophy to be able to do my exam. Thank you!
Another superlative of Wittgenstein was that he had the greatest army rank progression of all the Central Powers' personnel (more than 5M men) during WWI. Started as front soldier and ended as Lieutenant. He was an overachiever in every single thing he did.
someone took that thought experiment a little bit further: splitsider.com/2015/09/the-big-lebowski-wittgenstein-and-the-garbage-pile-that-is-online-discourse/
Omitting some quite essential points of the late Wittgenstein. For mathematical rules and rules of deduction are nothing but what the language games happens to "decide". Wittgenstein believing that basically language constitutes reality. Which is different from saying that we can only understand reality through language. We do not only understand reality through language, according ti Wittgenstein, we form it. Far more radical than you make him out to be.
I would find it lovely to see a video on the Marquis de Sade; I find very challenging trying to talk about him and not a lot of people know him. Please add him to your list!
Nice dose & insight into the Human Condition. I look for accessible signposts toward a Path of Goodness, yet philosophy gets "heady" at times. Enjoyed "meeting" Wittgenstein, of whom I'd never heard but found a quote of his that gave pause to my mental struggle about what's not working: "The solution of the problem of life is seen in the vanishing of the problem. Is not this the reason why those who have found after a long period of doubt that the sense of life became clear have then been unable to say what constituted that sense."
language is working its way because (physical) world allows it to do so. language is also extension of our minds and is literally that part of mind which is designed for to be sending and receiving. those parts of mind which are not in us to be communicated are not accessible to it. those are two elementar boundaries. language is like when computer programing itself and find new way to do so and as such need to adapt output. hence music is constantly changing and we understand it because we can get to the inner syntax of mind through character and effort put into output of language a. k. a. body language, music, voice tonality, clues of persons presence in environment - steps tracking of animals, murders, others; read pictures, symbols, paints and so on.
The way I understood the 'language game' idea was to stop that allusive search for ultimate 'meaning' of words. According to Wittgenstein, meaning is simply the various ways in which the word is used, no more than that. And usage is simply a socially agreed convention, that changes as society changes. I see this as a counterargument to Russell, who thought that the particular language of maths could in fact be distilled down to atomic elements, with meanings that were so clear that no one could argue with them, or change them. Could you please do a video on Popper? I loved Popper's approach to the philosophy of science, but I keep being told that he's old hat and no one thinks as he did any more. But I don't understand what's wrong with his approach! thanks :)
Personally I think Wittgenstein almost certainly had Aspergers. He was certainly brilliant & temperamental. Common ASD traits. One of the true titans of the art of Philosophy.
I always had problems understanding Ludwig Wittgenstein complicated philosophy. This video helped me at least understand the basis of his philosophy. Thank You !
Thank you for the wonderful post; as usual, fascinating stuff...my summer reading list is exponentially growing! I would like to point out to those interested that a psychiatrist named Eric Berne observed the same phenomenon and documents it well in his book "Games People Play"
Any chance of making a video about Schopenhauer? :D Great respect for a channel ! You are making something really great which cannot be said for many thing now that are floathing in the world. Cheers for all the people here ! Best regards from Serbia!
+The School of Life Could you make one on Maimonides, the great Jewish thinker? You have done thinkers of every group except for religious Jewish thinkers.
I wonder what would have happened if Wittgenstein had taken LSD (or Magic mushroom). Many people who took that report that it was truly life changing experience , and had a powerful eye-opening insight about God, Life. When Ordinary people could have that much insight, what if great minds like Wittgenstein, Kierkegaard, Spinoza, Schuppenhauer, Kant had taken it.
Your interpretation of Wittgenstein's earlier philosophy seems a bit off. You mentioned how he was hung up on the idea that different people have different pictures of the shared definitions of the objects of the natural world. The is quite false, however. Wittgenstein's main approach had more to do with the philosophical pursuit of extended knowledge through means of extrapolating more meaning from the natural world through our understanding of the "atomic facts" which we create blurred and generalistic images of in our minds. He argues that coming up with new metaphysical theories based on the truth values of facts about the world is nonsense. This is because the world only presents itself. The world doesn't just show us truths about itself so that we can come up with new theories. His approach was somewhat like anti-philosophy. Even though his latter works seem to go completely against the Tractatus, they kind of support this anti-metaphilosophy approach to language. He later expands his doctrine on metaphysics. (The early Wittgenstein only talked about instances of language where we attempt to gain insight based on what's true, what's not true, and what is down right nonsense.) His later work talks about language as a whole and how it is used as a tool within interpersonal communicating which further promotes the idea that language, logic, and mathematics cannot be used to extrapolate set facts about the metaphysical nature of reality; in his view, those things are only used as tools for getting things done in an effective manner not to understand the mind of "God."
+Bryson Stewart Well said, he was truly one of this worlds greatest thinkers, completely underrated. And to think he once went to one of the same schools as Adolf Hitler.
Kaeben nope! It’s a fancy way of saying that the most important aspects of life (things that transcend our physical realm) cannot be defined by logic or language because our reality is bottlenecked by our limited usage of word identifiers and the fact that we’re encased in a 3-D reality that is also limit in nature. Think of words and think of the infinite atomic probabilities of the objects and states of affairs they try to identify. It’s only useful for practical instances, not for metaphysic problems for example. Wittgenstein was like a scientist with a religious mind without believing in religion!
"He inherited a lot of money" has to be the understatement of the century. He inherited the largest fortune in Austria and of the largest in Europe. He was rich beyond anyone's wildest dreams.
But he gave it all away, as he preferred the richness of intellect and solitude?
@@Ianbolton We are not sure. I was imparted in college by 2 masters of Ludwig's philosophy in a very refreshing and trailblazing style. Actually, I was imparted by one of them, the other I also knew, but was the mentor of the second, which is the one who taught me. I once asked him about this and his opinion was that it was probably mostly a result of Witt's own mild eccentricity, I suppose it's the same one that made him design one of his sister's houses so obsessively down to the milimeter. We will never know all the reasons.
until you found out that he didn't use the money at all, and living in the poor condition, volunteer to war, being school teacher, and live depressed life.
He attended the same grammar school as Hitler. There's a school picture of them with three boys between them. The greatest philosopher and greatest tyrant in the 20th century 4 feet from each other.
@@Ianbolton exactly, but that makes him a more interesting character!
"The limits of my language are the limits of my world"
true
Inasmuch as you are able to express it to others. But that is all and you will never be able to express it properly. The experience of the world happens before words are formed.
5.6
Nope. They're only the limits of your understanding of the world. 'Your world' in a sense I suppose, but never so rigid that it can't expand. It's like claiming that the limits of your world is the limitation of your conscious mind, which isn't true. The unconscious always has more to offer. That this process is itself a process and not something instantaneous is, I guess, the only limitation of it that we can claim in truth: that we're always cognizant of an expanding boundary, rather than knowing everything all at once and so, in language, the 'right' words for them.
VANDAL Word salad
Words cannot describe the excitement I felt when I saw this on my subscribe box.
Then again, they really can't.
***** same here hehehehe
***** well played, ha ha.
*****
can you please put a lnks in the video of the book(s) that are mention in it.
also in future videos can you make that please?.
thank you for this channel.
''... nothing is lost. The inexpressible is rather - inexpressibly - contained in the expressed ...'' Wittgenstein : Then we can get your excitement through these words my friend ... :)
Nice description, but not enough though.
I think this missed Wittgenstein's central point that the meaning of a word is its use in language. If I say "pick up the red apple," you know what I mean because the language is functional. If I say "what is the soul?" then we have philosophical problem on our hands. Wittgenstein believed that such questions were nonsense.
Our approach to understanding the physical world consists in asking questions about the nature of phenomenon and we encounter. A questions like, what is red?, can be answered somewhat satisfactorily by giving an account of radiation, wavelengths, the way our eyes function and so forth. We seem to be able to give an explanation. When we apply similar questions to more abstract objects or concepts or to more fundamental phenomenon we find that no good explanation can be given. We have reached the limits of language. Yet philosophers try to reach further by creating grand theoretical frameworks aimed at somehow accessing reality as it really is.
The misapplication of questions was something Wittgenstein called the theoretical attitude. When asking such a question we want the answer to give some new insight into the object. The best we can do is to give an account of how the word is used in the language, an ostensive definition. We want something deeper but you simply cannot go beneath language.
This view either does away with Platonism (the assertion that abstract objects and concepts like numbers and goodness exist independently of the human mind) or shows that language is limited in its ability to describe the platonic realm. Therefore Wittgenstein's philosophy dissolves much of philosophy by declaring the questions nonsense.
spetsnaz5 Perfect.
+spetsnaz5 Wouldn't that argument stem from the Tractatus only? Yes, as you say, key is that the meaning of words is in there use. But couldn't we, for example, have a conversation about what the "soul" is and come to a meaningful conclusion based on what we believe, think and feel; and have the establishment of the meaning of the term prove useful. Say, as a referent to the unknown or alleviating angst about it. Isn't the mistake to reify something, and think that we could get to know it better, simply because a word exists for it and, therefore, confuse reality with the terms that we have to describe it? I think that is the error with the Tractatus which is relieved in Philosophical Investigations.
+steelonius
Yes words do have meaning and are useful, but only within their
particular language game. If I started using the vocabulary of Christian theology and you were not well versed in this “language game” then my language would have no meaning for you. Even common words have different meanings depending on the context of their use; the theological meaning of love is different than what you would find in a chick flick.
When you ask if we could narrow our definition of the soul to make it more useful I am sure we could. Philosophers do that kind of thing all the time. I think of this as part of the philosophical language game. Philosophers tend to have definitions of common English words that are more precise than their common definitions. This allows for clearer discussion and reasoning.
However, if you ask a layperson to read some of these philosophical writings, without letting them read the portion of the text where terms are defined, it may take them a while to adjust their understanding of the words being used. This indicates
that the words have been removed from their common use, and are now jargon in a
particular academic language game. It follows that any insight gained by this sort of pursuit is similar to proving something within a formal system of your own devising. The insights don’t map back onto to the common uses of the words in question. It might be intellectually challenging but it’s not making the progress it appears to make at first blush.
In Philosophical Investigations, part of what Wittgenstein is encouraging is that we look at words the way they are ordinarily used instead of participating in the philosophical language game. But I still find there is a lot of beauty to be found in intellectual language games. There is beauty in their intricacy and they
often seem to be finer instruments for discussing various parts of life.
+Philip Blankenau Every field of learning has its own special words or jargon - e.g. biology, chemistry, physics, ballet, cookery. These are necessary and we just have to take time to learn their definitions
*Spetsnaz5* I think Wittgenstein was right in some ways, but dead wrong in others. We need better language that transcends the limitations of our current languages. We need to purposefully CREATE a new KIND of language. We did it with math, I see no reason we couldn't come up with something better for metaphysics than "picture-prompts in random games".
1:10 people communicate ideas through pictures
4:04 language games
5:22 language as tool for self-understanding
Wittgenstein would have loved today’s memes culture... which basically confirms his thoughts... a meme succinctly expresses what words cannot... he was ahead of his time..a man of the digital age.....
Yoooooo
Very often memes are just jokes, they don't mean much.
@@ritam8767 in every joke, there is always some truth in it... that’s why we laugh... because we recognise the truth.. memes use truth as a way of making us laugh... they are our subconscious
@@franceleeparis37 i find that to be true. people find amusement in memes about their mental state and sanity and comfort that some other being feels this way. it is also a convenient and humorous way to show ethical differences between two subjects.
Not really. memes are just, at times, illiterate peoples attempt at symbols. Mostly they’re just meant to be funny.
Witty G my nigga for life.
I'mma kill myself at his greatness.
HotSkull looooool
Do them Witty G gangsta signs maaaan
Favorite Wittgenstein Quotations:
If a lion could speak, I would not be able to understand him.
A dog can expect his master, but he cannot expect him on Tuesday.
All problems of philosophy are problems of language.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof must one remain silent.
Because dogs have no conception of language, and don't understand that one day we call Tuesday and another Monday and another Friday and so on. So, if it is Tuesday, and my dog expects me, then I can say my dog expects me and it is Tuesday, but I cannot say my dog expects me on Tuesday, because it's misleading. The doesn't know it is Tuesday, so he's really no expecting me on Tuesday; he's just expecting, and it just so happens to be Tuesday.
I know, right? That's the genius of Wittgenstein!
Hardly. The quotation comes from the start of a longer dialogue about the uniqueness and usefulness of language as a means to convey information, meaning, and intentions to another sentient being. Many other philosophers have built upon his work to talk about the possibility of alien logic. That is to say, an alien species whose logic, norms, and customs vary so greatly from our own that they would not be able to communicate with us in any meaningful way. Is such a species possible? That's difficult to say, as we've yet to encounter an alien intelligence, but the notion is nonetheless an interesting though to consider. In practical terms, the quotation is also useful as a way to realize that humans communicate with one another quite well, but with other species our communication is limited by the fact that we typically prefer verbal or written communication, whereas even other Earth-bound species communicate in ways that are distinct and to some extent foreign to us. More foreign even than English is say to someone who speaks only Chinese or Basque, or any other non-Indo-European language.
+Steven Dixon Even well defined seemingly straightforward words can be a matter of subjectivity.
Isn't the point even bigger, namely that if a lion could speak YOUR language you still could not understand it? It's 'inner world' would be quite alien even if the words sounded the same!
This channel feels like a catalouge where you can have some preinformation about philosophers and their interests, so you can pick one and start reading them !
1:47 - 2:04
I just love how we're given a visual representation of a concept that describes how the very exchange of language and ideas is processed as internal visual imagery of the mind.
I've actually thought about these exact ideas a lot myself without knowing if there was a philosopher I could look to for more. This is really interesting.
My continued efforts to build my vocabulary are for this exact reason: I’m always trying to find better ways and words to express myself, so I can show others what I truly mean, in attempts to build deeper and stronger connections.
The problem is it's a two way street. You can expand your vocabulary all you want, but if the listening party can't interpret & decipher your meaning in the way you intend, it's still all lost.
Don't have the ability to Express my ideas and thoughts properly to others is my biggest problem that can't be solved, and when I thought I'm the only person who have that problem this video came out of nowhere to me.
Wittgenstein is my bro👊
Thank you so much for popularizing and democratizing philosophy. Alain, we are a big fan of you in Bangladesh. We sincerely express our gratitude to you for making these type quality materials available to us. As a result of CZcams community, knowledge is no longer a privilege of the wealthy few. Let the wisdom of philosophy be there for all to share....spread even to the poorest hut of Bangladesh.
-Love from Khulna, Bangladesh.
Love from Bengal (y)
Saludos desde Argentina a los amigos de Bangladesh 😊🇦🇷
अर्जेंटीना और बांग्लादेश के सभी दोस्तों को भारत का नमस्ते 😊❤
Why'd you have to make it so formal?
beautiful sentiments
It's 2021. I'm a philosopher major and have just read thru many lecture slides, hardly understanding what Wittgenstein meant in his early and then late work. The "about face" he took on his stance in language. Watching this video, helped me understand it. Thank you so much.
Since the video explains some basic threads of his personal life, it really should be mentioned he served for years as an officer in World War I, winning valor awards, being imprisoned - and writing much of Tractatus in the process. It is unlikely that such an experience did not affect his character and ideas at least as much as the other personal details covered.
He started as a front soldier and finished the war as Lieutenant. It was the greatest progression through the ranks in ALL of the Austro-Hungarian army. This guy was the definition of overachiever. Whatever he decided to do, he frickin aced it.
@@Ardakapalasan
Apart from his school teacher years. Sorrow mostly marks that out. But what it would have been to have been a student of his. His spritual side seems to have been secularised..
Him being autistic (identified after his death, more recently with new knowledge on autism and how it presents) should also be mentioned as that is the foundation to all of his thoughts & work.
suicide of three brothers broke my heart rip to Ludwig and brothers, may they return to loving parents and a loving world
I think this is why meme's are becoming a great way of communication.
You are amazing at the game of communication. Please keep it up.
Burning Lion how do you mean a meme is a great way of communication?
@@spacefertilizer i think later Wittgenstein might agree memes are better than words because sometimes they can be more precise in a practical sense, but earlier Wittgenstein or Russell might disagree because memes are hard to form a logical system to carry out accurate message logically where natural language has more potential
This is not a very good summary of the Tractatus. A quote from Wittgenstein's Introduction to the Tractatus (a title which Wittgenstein himself did not like and did not use when later speaking of the work) will give you more information than this video:
"The book deals with the problems of philosophy and shows, as I believe, that the method of formulating these problems rests on the misunderstanding of the logic of our language. Its whole meaning could be summed up somewhat as follows: What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent."
He is most definitely not promoting a theory of communication or a theory of any sort. You will not find the word "theory" anywhere in the work except when talking about other philosopher's theories or when he is explicitly stating that philosophy and logic are not theories:
"Philosophy is not a theory but an activity." (4.112)
"Logic is not a theory but a reflexion of the world." (6.13)
Understanding the fact that he is not proposing a theory and is, in fact, chiefly trying to show why proposing a theory does not make sense in philosophy and logic is fundamental to understanding the Tractatus.
The book is about understanding the logic of language. He is trying to show that the way that philosophers formulate traditional philosophical problems is confused because they misunderstand the logic of language. He wanted the book to help philosophers come to an understanding of the logic of language. And he believed at the time of the writing of the Tractatus that if one comes to understand the logic of language, all of the major problems of philosophy are dissolved.
I appreciate the efforts of those who want to make Wittgenstein accessible to a larger population. And to the extent these efforts lead one to actually pick up a text and study it for oneself it is a worthy project. But I offer this summary of what Wittgenstein said to a group of students in an Introduction to Philosophy Course:
"I can't teach you anything that I know without your having to work just as hard as I did to learn it."
^
Patrick Horn I did have to work hard to read Philosophical Investigations with some degree of understanding. It was rough going. I might study one paragraph for a whole evening, and be glad if I could figure out what he was talking about.
@@RalphDratman Yeah true. Wittgenstein is one tough nut to crack...
@@sudharamakrishnan5766 true, one of the more complicated philosophers I've read along with Hegel
I watched this video and was surprised at the like/dislike ratio, because it's a bunch of nonsense! Thank you for correcting the video.
I really appreciate the kind of subject matter Wittgenstein tackles here regarding language and misinterpretation. Communication can go wrong so damn often. People interpret simple compliments and offers to help as having sinister motives or double meanings, granted because they've been manipulated by language before, but they no longer associate these phrases with their true meaning. Comedy is in danger of censorship because people never understand the intent of jokes. People have become so judgmental and paranoid because they are so afraid of being manipulated or being taken as a fool, that they develop trust issues which interfere with their ability to make friends and thrive socially. In a situation like this, both sides need to take some form of responsibility. The speaker has to be more precise and clear when discussing his/her idea and the listener has to be more open-minded and considerate of the speaker; giving them the benefit of the doubt in order to uncover their true intention.
You explained Wittgenstein's philosophy very well. Thank you.
These videos are absolutely excellent - the writing is entirely lucid, the visuals are compelling and extremely well constructed, and the voice is completely perfect for the material.
Some of the ancient presocratic philosophers could be very interesting for future topics!
warning: they r usually wrong
The school of life is like reading a tabloid news paper, nice pictures, easily understood, but skewed to fit with time/space, and a dumbed down narrative. Not at all accurate or complex enough in this case.
wittgenstein's writing was somewhat poetic and this video is like a textbook example of how people misinterpret him
Can't you elaborate?
@@Garcian They are wrong about almost everything that comes to his actual work. I believe the biography holds about true though
Thanks to Wittgenstein, we had the linguistic turn in the philosophy. A lot of philosophical problems exist because we don't understand our language. Some philosophers and linguists might even say that philosophy is dead and everything that was a philosophical thing is now a linguistic thing or a science thing.
Please, more philosopher/literature/psychology videos. These are immensely valuable. Thanks.
This is a phenomenal channel. Spending (not wasting) hours catching up on things learned in the past and learning things I never bothered or was offered to learn. Keep great lessons coming.
" I confini del mio linguaggio sono I confini del mio mondo" I just love this man.
Sweet christ, this poor guy had a rough background. Certainly explains how he was able to unpack the nuances of human interaction.
***** anyway they wouldn't understand each other ))
Must have had a nasty family, considering the plethora of suicides.
He was terribly neurotic and very wealthy. But he tried... to help. That counts. And yes, language is at the core of our ability to think. Then again, "thinking" may be overrated. Feeling / thinking has gotten us all the way up to HERE. July 2019 AD. You are a witness... to the ongoing world.
@ money isn't everything, you simpleton
Possibly part of the reason for his stuttering is the neurobiological issue that ran in his family. There's a link between stuttering and bipolar disorder.
“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.” When I think of Wittgenstein, I mostly think of the line from the ending of Hamlet: "the rest is silence," effectively sounding the death knell for metaphysics.
Not at all, explain what you mean by the death of metaphysics or are you paraphrasing something from somewhere else.
While this is a nice sort of "everyday" interpretation of Wittgenstein's work, I think it sort of misses the point.
The Tractatus was meant to show how issues in philosophy arise from misunderstanding language. One of the examples he gives is the idea of the "soul". To have any sort of discussion of the soul, there needs to be a clear understanding of what the soul is. If a clear definition cannot be made, the aim should not be to try to answer the question but rather show that the question is incoherent. His aim was to show how "problems" in philosophy are not questions that need to be answered, but that one should show that the problem does not exist in the first place.
ive said this before but i absolutely love the humour of these animators. the way the man moves at 3:50 is subtle comedy gold
Exactly, I always enjoy to watch this humorous artistic processing. I also laughed at head animation at 3:38
what
Words are weak, there are too many words in the world from over 6000 languages, yet still these words cannot describe everything, it cannot even describe the taste of pasta I had tonight
Eagerly waiting for a video on Bertrand Russell.
The guy from Get Him to the Greek?
@@mrbubbles69able no. that's Russell Brand.
@@mrbubbles69able I always get them mixed up as well, then I remember this wee rhyme our granny taught us:
The one from Get Him To The Greek
Was Russell Brand, the sexy freak
The philosopher with logic and muscle
Was the Welsh Nobel laureate, Bertrand Russell
I’d be interested to hear Alan perspective on Russell and particularly his message to the future.
czcams.com/video/QEZgDA_FKrI/video.html
Vocabulary is a gift to mankind. To put a label on things that you don't even how to describe like a weird commotion in your head.
Well books made me realise that everyone goes through this.
i love this channel so so so much. you guys are my heroes. you make such wonderfully edited, visually appealing, and thought provoking videos. each video i've seen is honestly a masterpiece. you can explain philosophical thought in such a relatable and palatable way. thank you for your wisdom. i truly think you guys are making the world a better place and helping people with daily struggles. i wish you the best of luck!
Yes you guys are freaking amazing!
Hear hear Alain in my humble opinion is right up there with David attenborough no wait he far surpasses him, such a unique and recognizable voice .... and the content is pure gold
What a terrific video ... my dad was Dutch and now I'm even more proud of my heritage watching this video of Baruch Spinoza. I'm a "Spinozan" now.
How fitting that this should be one of the clearest videos explaining a rather difficult idea I've ever come across! Thank you so much!
How strange! This was an observation - that words sort of form pictures in the mind - I made a couple of years back. I thought it was just a form of learning that I had adopted, but when I tested the idea on friends the looked at me like I was wonky. They didn't understand why I immediately formed visuals in my head as I consumed or produced words. Yet a great philosopher has already written extensively on this idea and I'm so glad to have found this video. I must find this book and read it.
From the first, Wittgenstein was my personal favorite. I guess because
we cannot really get anywhere with
'any' communication without first
it. Even still, it can never be the same.
Really well done with this video, condensing both books and some biography into less than 7 minutes is a real feat!
What I enjoy most about Wittgenstein is that he was very concrete. Too many philosophers immersed themselves into symbolism; an art that is frequently misinterpreted; also an art where every author swears to have the code "unlocked".
I just want to mention that the Wittgenstein family was even wealthier that you might think. When Wittgenstein was born, his father was far and way one of the richest men in all of Europe; this is no joke. No other philosopher on this list (I've watched them all) was as rich as he originally was.
Can you tell me about Synthetic, and Analytic, in Philosophy
@@darlenethompson6791 Analytic referes to anything derivable purely from the definition, if you say 2+2=4, then 2+2+2=4+2=6 that is an analytical argument, another one is all bachelors are unmarried men, which doesn't say anything new while using a definition, but a synthetic argument, would be to bring new knowledge into a definition, such as John is a bachelor, therefore he is unmarried, this is because no where in the definition of Bachelor is John present.
I think the limitations of language and our ability to accurately use it to represent ideas, feelings, thoughts, is the crux of the majority of conflict presented in our species and the world we live in.
I'm going to go develop a language that offers intrinsic coding to the game being played with the idea being conveyed, and I strongly feel I should figure out how to work math into it as well, so I'll be gone a bit. Don't wait up for me.
First month mark
I said don't wait up for me! You'll disturb my process. XD
Here's a suggestion: If you want this language to utilize category theory and conceptual mathematics to the highest degree by acknowledging both the object-oriented and process-relational approach to reality, I recommend you emulate Chomsky's Hierarchy.
"...offers intrinsic coding to the game being played with the idea being conveyed, and I strongly feel I should figure out how to work math into it as well..."
If you're serious about this I've a silver bullet for you. Philosophical individuation, as a process, is exactly the same as the method through which Surreal Numbers were invented/discovered. PI just happens to be the process through which literally every THING is created - no exceptions.
I'm available for comment if you're actually trying to do this but it gets very...personally destructive the further you go.
You just opened up Pandora's box. Watch yourself or you'll soon have the death sentence on twelve systems.
Far and away my favorite philosopher. Maybe the study of philosophy should begin with this genius.
Thank you very much for this timely video! I have been having the same struggles of Wittingenstein since high school. I have only realised just how much information is lost in translation the past two years. It has brought me peace instead of anxiety whenever there is silence between a colleague and I. Most of my social awkwardness was generated by me guessing and over reading any signals and ignoring the blatant ones. I'm so happy to see that I am not the only one who faced the same issues and found similar answers! :)
How magickal that saying a word that was spelled, changes the receivers consciousness and evokes a mental image that affects the others perceptions
Thank you. I learned about him on SAT of my country version, and this really healped me to learn about his works.
people who learn languages should study this guy.
"Went to live in Spartan solitude in Norway. Then he started writing the Tractatus". That's not how it happened. He volunteered to serve as front soldier in World War I (during which he was wounded and decorated many times) and wrote the book while in the trenches. His father died after the war and that's when he inherited the fortune.
Yes. This video really downplayed the circumstances in which the Tractatus was written.
This served as a great introduction to Wittgenstein for me. I have come back and rewatched this and shown it to many others. Like any media it is a particular perspective on, in this case, the work of Wittgenstein. If Wittengetin was focused on logic and understanding well this is a particular perspective of that focus - and to me it appears to end on a rather optimistic note. It does not seem as if logic or understanding concern optimism at all really. It appears that the closest Wittgenstein comes to this in his efforts was to say one must "pull up the ladder" so to speak, or that words, and therefore understanding can only go so far - then there is nothing left to do but to be silent. If you follow understanding to its logical end then there is nothing to be said. "Letting the fly out of the fly bottle" is an optimistic way of balancing this idea - and it is nice to consider in closing. Again - I think this is a great intro but the rabbit hole - it goes so far and then - even then, at its greatest depth, there are no answers to be spoken.
Great video as always, but I was looking forward to hearing a tad about Wittgenstein's 1929 Lecture on Ethics for it is in my opinion, a 'little' piece of his mind that truly transcends his own thoughts and elevates them to this pragmatically beautiful new perspective..
I highly recommend watching Derek Jarman's film about this philosopher, aptly titled "Wittgenstein". It's just as didactic and enjoyable as this video.
I've been waiting for this one you beautiful people. And Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus is pure genius anyone who finds this interesting should read it, it's not an easy read but it's relatively short and if you can understand it and all and get through it's a beautiful and mind blowing and incredible book.
***** unfortunately not yet, but I very much need to do so unfortunately I've got many another book as well exams to get out of the way first.
***** fair enough, I'd assume it would be more minor points than the over all message though cos there certainly are several flaws in the argument though it seems to me that it reaches a good conclusion. And the north of England, off to uni next year.
***** Wittgenstein himself did do the translation and considering his whole idea is that misinterpretation of language is problematic I'm fairly confident that the translation he would have done would have accurately represented what he was trying to say.
I think it shows the genius of his work that he was the first to see language games. A generation later, Transactional Analysis became the coffee-table book of choice for the pseuds...
thank you, this makes Wittgenstein a bit easier too understand
I am sure Wittgenstein's observations about language and the games behind communicating have been very useful for psychotherapy.
"The boundary of my language is the boundary of my world" -Ludwig Wittgenstein-
My sir Ludwig Wittgenstein is not there but his thinking is alive into every human's brain! And that is about language and which is the same as thinking! ❤️🙏
I use this guy's holy blade to hunt beast in the waking world
Aza Jabar May you find your worth in the waking world.
Nick Wilhelm Jo Oh good hunter
Is this a reference to something? Perhaps his text?
This statement seems to be carefully constructed so as to be as ambiguous as possible. Possibly to demonstrate a point on mental pictures in communication? :)
James Orth it is a reference to Bloodborne, it is a video game on PS4 one of the weapons called "Ludwig's holy blade"
Aza Jabar Thanks. I haven't heart of that one.
The seminal work on human's inability to communicate with one another is Martin Buber's "I and Thou." Buber asserts that we live our lives "in monologue," that we automatically frame what they say as to how it pertains to ourselves rather than the person telling us.
He was a great philosopher
When I see bright yellow thumbnail on my CZcams homepage, a little more attention is diverted to what I'm seeing! At last, 'Philosophy'!
I was introduced to Ludwig's theory while I was doing an assignment on the famous 'Brain In A Vat' theory when I read that Wittgenstein rejected the theory on the basis that it does not change as to how we view things or a simple 'So What?'. Seen glimpses till know, next year is reserved for reading his works. Wonderful thinker.
Wow. I think this video needs a warning - it has very little to do with Wittgenstein! The story of his life is reasonable accurate, but the account of what he was trying to do overall plus the account of the Tractatus and the account of the Investigations are wildly inaccurate. The Tractatus is not about how we try to recreate pictures in other people's mind - it explores the conundrum of how language can be used to convey meaning. The Investigations are not about noticing that language is not just about stating facts; rather it is about how we misunderstand the relationship between the Inner and the Outer and the role of language in allowing ourselves to express ourselves. But there you go :-)
you are acting like the school of life is a good resource for understanding philosophy
Thank you Paul. You're a hero.
I too have felt that school of life, often and without taking responsibility, misses the main point around some topics.
But then again, I also cannot help but think that my interest in philosophy and degree can be credited to this channel.
So in the end, we need mass media to add glamour to philosophy in order to make it relatable and applicable to times. However, we do need people like you who can always show my fly the way out of the fly bottle. :)
m
I have "Apantashia", which is diagnosed so lately, 2015, is a neurologic statement that one cannot see in their mind's eye. So when I learned that, I also realize that I'm not thinking with pictures which is so primitive but instead I'm thinking with words. I know what Wittgenstein mean by that, words are symbolizations of the sensations one've got so it leads to communication problems. But I wanted to underline that maybe not everybody has to ability to think the way we assume they are. This is also, I think, a possible philosophical question too.
Thank you for all these videos! they help me a lot with my study.
I have big trouble trying to study if I don't have an interesting environment. The visual and clear voice made it very easy for me to understand enough of philosophy to be able to do my exam. Thank you!
Didn't you misinterpret his whole concept of imagery?
Could you explain please? :)
@@BanterrClaus by adding pictures
the words are keys, but they are also sound, and only sound. our mind and builded logic builds a omago or game within our words
i like to watch The School of Life videos when drinking wine. Makes me feel doubleplussmart. For a while
***** quick question, what animating software is used for the making of these videos?
Cameron Carnage there are a great deal of animation software but for this kind of animation i would recommend Adobe After Effects
Can I obtain that for free, well I mean either way I would just torrent it lmao
I loved 1984
Another superlative of Wittgenstein was that he had the greatest army rank progression of all the Central Powers' personnel (more than 5M men) during WWI. Started as front soldier and ended as Lieutenant. He was an overachiever in every single thing he did.
These videos are incredibly insightful and well presented. How have I not found this channel before? Subscribed.
Excellent. Simple, concise and goes directly to the main thesis
Imagine how happy he'd be living in our times with social media, maybe.
i think he would be puking every single day
+GeilerRitter yes he would be puking, agreed
someone took that thought experiment a little bit further:
splitsider.com/2015/09/the-big-lebowski-wittgenstein-and-the-garbage-pile-that-is-online-discourse/
Social media has given us more access, but it appears to me that it has caused us to drift further apart than we'd like to admit...
it seems to be part of the puzzle that is the question why right winged assholes are on the rise across the entire planet.
Omitting some quite essential points of the late Wittgenstein. For mathematical rules and rules of deduction are nothing but what the language games happens to "decide". Wittgenstein believing that basically language constitutes reality. Which is different from saying that we can only understand reality through language. We do not only understand reality through language, according ti Wittgenstein, we form it.
Far more radical than you make him out to be.
I would find it lovely to see a video on the Marquis de Sade; I find very challenging trying to talk about him and not a lot of people know him. Please add him to your list!
The way you speak German is spot on.
Human beings are awesome
Indigo Anon but not me :(
Nice dose & insight into the Human Condition. I look for accessible signposts toward a Path of Goodness, yet philosophy gets "heady" at times. Enjoyed "meeting" Wittgenstein, of whom I'd never heard but found a quote of his that gave pause to my mental struggle about what's not working: "The solution of the problem of life is seen in the vanishing of the problem. Is not this the reason why those who have found after a long period of doubt that the sense of life became clear have then been unable to say what constituted that sense."
Gracias por los subtitulos en español. saludos desde Colombia :)
language is working its way because (physical) world allows it to do so. language is also extension of our minds and is literally that part of mind which is designed for to be sending and receiving. those parts of mind which are not in us to be communicated are not accessible to it. those are two elementar boundaries. language is like when computer programing itself and find new way to do so and as such need to adapt output. hence music is constantly changing and we understand it because we can get to the inner syntax of mind through character and effort put into output of language a. k. a. body language, music, voice tonality, clues of persons presence in environment - steps tracking of animals, murders, others; read pictures, symbols, paints and so on.
Please do bertrand russell...
Reza .A "Maths is weird and i like to cry". There you go
+
@Bruno56 sure, moron
@@lugus9261 elaborate.
@@deepstariaenigmatica2601 thats it, that's Russell. Pack it up boys
The best of all is that this channel is puting ideas into our mind through pictures
Thank you so much for introducing me to this philosopher! I was just telling my mom that I needed to improve my communication skills
This is exactly why Socrates would always make people define things. Truly the OG philosopher
The way I understood the 'language game' idea was to stop that allusive search for ultimate 'meaning' of words. According to Wittgenstein, meaning is simply the various ways in which the word is used, no more than that. And usage is simply a socially agreed convention, that changes as society changes. I see this as a counterargument to Russell, who thought that the particular language of maths could in fact be distilled down to atomic elements, with meanings that were so clear that no one could argue with them, or change them.
Could you please do a video on Popper? I loved Popper's approach to the philosophy of science, but I keep being told that he's old hat and no one thinks as he did any more. But I don't understand what's wrong with his approach!
thanks :)
Language is a public tool for the understanding of private life......top notch🙌
Personally I think Wittgenstein almost certainly had Aspergers. He was certainly brilliant & temperamental. Common ASD traits. One of the true titans of the art of Philosophy.
I always had problems understanding Ludwig Wittgenstein complicated philosophy. This video helped me at least understand the basis of his philosophy. Thank You !
Thank you for the wonderful post; as usual, fascinating stuff...my summer reading list is exponentially growing! I would like to point out to those interested that a psychiatrist named Eric Berne observed the same phenomenon and documents it well in his book "Games People Play"
I didn't think that a visual novel would eventually bring me here
Any chance of making a video about Schopenhauer? :D
Great respect for a channel ! You are making something really great which cannot be said for many thing now that are floathing in the world. Cheers for all the people here ! Best regards from Serbia!
Did. . .did you just follow the suggestion of Schopenhauer with a smiley emote?
+R.T Whitby I don't know why Schopenhauer wouldn't be considered a philosopher.
Oh, I consider Homer a poet but they do videos on all of academia.
+The School of Life Could you make one on Maimonides, the great Jewish thinker? You have done thinkers of every group except for religious Jewish thinkers.
Homer Simpson?
Very interesting his late investigations to understand the power of words and images in our confusing times 💛
How could you leave out the part where he fought in World War I?!??!!
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWI
I have a filosophy exam tomorrow and these videos are my only hope
you have to cover diogenes
+Luc Groshens Bark bark
The og shitposter....
@@wewuzvikangz4829 loool
I can hardly express how awesome these videos are. Thanks so much for this little dosis of knowledge!
I wonder what would have happened if Wittgenstein had taken LSD (or Magic mushroom). Many people who took that report that it was truly life changing experience , and had a powerful eye-opening insight about God, Life.
When Ordinary people could have that much insight, what if great minds like Wittgenstein, Kierkegaard, Spinoza, Schuppenhauer, Kant had taken it.
this is probably the worst comment ive ever seen
This was an eye opener, I intend to read the book now
Your interpretation of Wittgenstein's earlier philosophy seems a bit off. You mentioned how he was hung up on the idea that different people have different pictures of the shared definitions of the objects of the natural world. The is quite false, however.
Wittgenstein's main approach had more to do with the philosophical pursuit of extended knowledge through means of extrapolating more meaning from the natural world through our understanding of the "atomic facts" which we create blurred and generalistic images of in our minds. He argues that coming up with new metaphysical theories based on the truth values of facts about the world is nonsense. This is because the world only presents itself. The world doesn't just show us truths about itself so that we can come up with new theories. His approach was somewhat like anti-philosophy.
Even though his latter works seem to go completely against the Tractatus, they kind of support this anti-metaphilosophy approach to language. He later expands his doctrine on metaphysics. (The early Wittgenstein only talked about instances of language where we attempt to gain insight based on what's true, what's not true, and what is down right nonsense.) His later work talks about language as a whole and how it is used as a tool within interpersonal communicating which further promotes the idea that language, logic, and mathematics cannot be used to extrapolate set facts about the metaphysical nature of reality; in his view, those things are only used as tools for getting things done in an effective manner not to understand the mind of "God."
+Bryson Stewart Well said, he was truly one of this worlds greatest thinkers, completely underrated. And to think he once went to one of the same schools as Adolf Hitler.
>putting hume over aristotle/kant
wew
So, a fancy way of saying "define your terms"?
Kaeben
nope! It’s a fancy way of saying that the most important aspects of life (things that transcend our physical realm) cannot be defined by logic or language because our reality is bottlenecked by our limited usage of word identifiers and the fact that we’re encased in a 3-D reality that is also limit in nature.
Think of words and think of the infinite atomic probabilities of the objects and states of affairs they try to identify. It’s only useful for practical instances, not for metaphysic problems for example.
Wittgenstein was like a scientist with a religious mind without believing in religion!