Advertisement

The Dichtung of Analytic Philosophy: Wittgenstein’s Legacy from Frege and Its Consequences

  • Allan JanikEmail author
Chapter
  • 179 Downloads
Part of the Nordic Wittgenstein Studies book series (NRWS, volume 3)

Abstract

Wittgenstein’s attitude to writing philosophy is an important part of his complex legacy from Frege. Even the frequently misconstrued phrase, “Philosophie dürfte man eigentlich nur dichten”, is part of that legacy. How should we actually render that sentence in English? How is the idea that Dichtung is a necessary aspect of philosophical method rooted in thoughts that ultimately find their way back to Frege? Where do we find Dichtung in the so-called private language argument? How is Wittgenstein’s view of the role of Dichtung in philosophy related to his appreciation of humor in philosophizing? What is the role of humor in Frege’s work? How does Wilhelm Busch in Eduards Traum illustrate the philosophical significance of humorous Dichtung? What is the link between Dichtung and craftsmanship in writing philosophy for Wittgenstein? These are the central issues that the article addresses.

Keywords

Examples Fiction in philosophy Frege Objectivity Philosophical practice Self-knowledge Busch, Wilhelm Wittgenstein 

References

  1. Busch, W. (1959). Eduards Traum. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  2. Drury, M. O’C. (1981). Some notes on conversations with Wittgenstein. In R. Rhees (Ed.), Ludwig Wittgenstein: Personal recollections (pp. 90–111). Totowa: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  3. Ficker, L. (2014). Ludwig (von) Ficker—Ludwig Wittgenstein: Briefwechsel 1914–1920. A. Steinsiek, & A. Unterkircher (Eds.). Innsbruck: Innsbruck University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Frege, G. (1879). Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle: Verlag Louis Nebert.Google Scholar
  5. Frege, G. (1884/1987). Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik: Eine logisch mathematische Untersuchung über den Begriff der Zahl. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  6. Frege, G. (1893/1962). Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, begriffsschriftlich abgeleitet. Bd. 1. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  7. Frege, G. (1989). Gottlob Frege: Briefe an Ludwig Wittgenstein. A. Janik, & C. P. Berger (Eds.). Grazer Philosophische Studien, 33/34, 3–33.Google Scholar
  8. Gabriel, G. (1991). Der Logiker als Metaphoriker: Freges philosophische Rhetorik. In G. Gabriel (Ed.), Zwischen Logik und Literatur: Erkenntnisformen von Dichtung, Philosophie und Wissenschaft (pp. 65–88). Stuttgart: Metzler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jäger, G. (1970). Das Gattungsproblem in der Ästhetik und Poetik von 1780 bis 1850. In J. Hermand & M. Windfuhr (Eds.), Zur Literatur der Restaurationsepoche 1815–1848 (pp. 2–30). Stuttgart: J.B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
  10. Janik, A. (2009). Assembling reminders. Stockholm: Santérus.Google Scholar
  11. Kant, I. (1966). Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  12. Kraus, J. (1994). Wilhelm Busch. Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
  13. Malcolm, N. (1958). Ludwig Wittgenstein: A memoir. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. McGuinness, B. (1988). Wittgenstein: A life. Young Ludwig, 1889–1921. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  15. McGuinness, B. (2006). In praise of nonsense. In R. Calcaterra (Ed.), Le ragioni del conoscere e dell’agire: Scritti in onore di Rosaria Egidi (pp. 357–365). Milan: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
  16. Pape, W. (1977). Wilhelm Busch. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Perloff, M. (2011). Writing philosophy as poetry: Literary form in Wittgenstein. In O. Kuusela & M. McGinn (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Wittgenstein (pp. 714–728). Oxford: Oxford University Press. The article is also to be found on the homepage of the Wittgenstein Initiative, Vienna: http://wittgenstein-initiative.com/
  18. Rothhaupt, J. (2013). Ludwig Wittgenstein über Wilhelm Busch: “He has the REAL philosophical urge.”. In V. Munz, K. Puhl, & J. Wang (Eds.), Language and world: Part two—signs, minds and actions (pp. 297–315). Heusenstamm: Ontos Verlag.Google Scholar
  19. Sluga, H. (1980). Gottlob Frege. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  20. Stern, J. P. (1966). Karl Kraus’s vision of language. The Modern Language Review, 61, 73–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Timms, E. (1986). Karl Kraus, apocalyptic satirist. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Willems, G. (1998). Abschied vom Wahren-Schönen-Guten: Wilhelm Busch und die Anfänge der ästhetischen Moderne. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
  23. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations/Philosophische Untersuchungen. G. E. M. Anscombe (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. Wittgenstein, L. (1967). Zettel/Zettel. G. E. M. Anscombe (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Wittgenstein, L. (1969). On certainty/Über Gewissheit. D. Paul, & G. E. M. Anscombe (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Wittgenstein, L. (1980). Culture and value/Vermischte Bemerkungen. G. H. Wright (Ed.), von in collaboration with Nyman, H., P. Winch (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Wittgenstein, L. (1998). Culture and value/Vermischte Bemerkungen. G. H. von Wright (Ed.), in collaboration with Nyman, H.; Rev. ed. by Pichler, A.; P. Winch (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  28. Wittgenstein, L. (2015–). Bergen Nachlass Edition (Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen under the direction of A. Pichler (Ed.)). In Wittgenstein Source http://www.wittgensteinsource.org/. Bergen: WAB.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of ViennaViennaAustria
  2. 2.University of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations