Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Schriftenreihe der Wittgenstein-Gesellschaft ((SWG,volume 19/1))

Abstract

The main aim of this essay is to show that Wittgenstein’s general conception of logic, as expressed in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and his later conception of philosophical grammar can be reconciled with each other, provided that his earlier and his later views are modified in the light of certain specific criticisms. These criticisms are based on two grounds. One is Wittgenstein’s early neglect of important differences between various philosophical activities and the methods employed in them, in particular between the roles of description and of reconstruction in philosophical analysis. The other is an incompleteness in his later description of ordinary language and of its connections with the specialist languages of mathematics and the sciences. An important example is his account of the nature of continuity, which Leibniz regarded as one of the two labyrinths of the human mind.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. For a more detailed treatment see my Fundamental Questions of Philosophy (Brighton, 1969) ch. 2 and Metaphysics: Its Structure and Function (Cambridge, 1984) Pt I and Pt II ch.12.

    Google Scholar 

  2. For a more detailed discussion see e.g. “Über Idealisierung im Theoretischen und Praktischen Denken” in Traditionen und Perspektiven der analytischen Philosophie,ed. by W.L. Gombocz et al. (Vienna, 1989) pp. 343–358.

    Google Scholar 

  3. e.g. De Docta Ignorantia ed. by R. Klibansky, ( Hamburg, 1977 ).

    Google Scholar 

  4. For such a comparison see e.g. P.M.S. Hacker Insight and Illusion 2nd edition (Oxford, 1986) ch. II.

    Google Scholar 

  5. See “Some Remarks on Logical Form” in Arist. Soc. Suppl. Vol. IX (London, 1929) and a letter in Mind vol XLII, (London, 1933) pp. 415, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  6. See book VI of Aristotle’s Physics and Brentano’s Raum, Zeit und Kontinuum (Hamburg, 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  7. For his later views on continuity see in particular “On Continuity: Wittgenstein’s Ideas 1938” in Discussions of Wittgenstein by Rush Rhees, (London, 1970)

    Google Scholar 

  8. For a more detailed discussion and comparison of Wittgenstein’s and the legal theorists’ approach to inexact concepts see my “Über Sprachspiele und rechtliche Institutionen” in Proc. of the 5th International Wittgenstein Symposium ed. by E. Morscher and R. Stranzinger (Vienna, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  9. For more detailed discussions see my Experience and Theory (London, 1966) and J.P. Cleave, “Quasi-Boolean Algebras, Empirical Continuity and Three-Valued Logic” in Zeitschr. f. Math. Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik vol 22 (1978) pp. 481–500.

    Google Scholar 

  10. See Rush Rhees op. cit. in note 7.

    Google Scholar 

  11. See the former’s discussion of c uvcxr1ó and the latter’s discussion of ’Grenze’ in the works quoted in note 6.

    Google Scholar 

  12. See the motto of Spengler’s Untergang des Abendlandes,which Wittgenstein much admired.

    Google Scholar 

  13. See e.g. A. Heyting, Intuitionism — An Introduction (Amsterdam, 1956).

    Google Scholar 

  14. For a discussion of this question see op. cit. in note 1, ch 5.

    Google Scholar 

  15. See e.g. ch. 5 of La Science et L’Hypothèse and ch. 3 of Science et Méthode.

    Google Scholar 

  16. See P. Bernays “Comments on Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics in Ratio vol II (Frankfurt, 1959).

    Google Scholar 

  17. For details see e.g. my “On Scientific Information, Explanation and Progress” in Proc. of the VII. Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science ed. by Ruth Marcus et al. (Amsterdam, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Rudolf Haller Johannes Brandl

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Springer-Verlag Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Körner, S. (1990). On Wittgenstein’s Conceptions of Logic and Philosophical Grammar. In: Haller, R., Brandl, J. (eds) Wittgenstein — Eine Neubewertung / Wittgenstein — Towards a Re-Evaluation. Schriftenreihe der Wittgenstein-Gesellschaft, vol 19/1. J.F. Bergmann-Verlag, Munich. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-30086-2_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-30086-2_12

  • Publisher Name: J.F. Bergmann-Verlag, Munich

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-209-01122-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-30086-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics