Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

John Searle on Ludwig Wittgenstein: Section 2

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
55,064
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Feb 17, 2008

I'm sorry for the cliffhanger at the end...:)

Bryan Magee talks to John Searle about the legacy of Ludwig Wittgenstein; ranging from his early work, the Tractatus, to his posthumously published, Philosophical Investigations.

Section 1:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qrmPq8pzG9Q

Section 2:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=kl-iLxleHaw

Section 3:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cjZBNDW7DmQ

Section 4:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lGfHQzOzp9s

Section 5:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=p4q0ntDIQBw

  • likes, 3 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Top Comments

  • What a cliff hanger!

  • In which Jung work is the "woodchuck" quote from?

see all

All Comments (130)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Wittgenstein dying at 62, though, for a man born in the last decade of the 19th century, and having fought in WWI and survived it and its aftermath for the continental central powers, and subsequently, as a native European, survived the WWII era, is not retrospectively (or according to the actuarial tables) constitutive of a "short life," nonetheless, given the longstanding authority of his work, and the potential result of his having had died between his conflicting works, makes one frustrated.

  • @Maartenn100 He realizes this, and in his Tractatus he creates the metaphor that he has used his words as a ladder to bring people to understanding, and once that has been achieved, the ladder should be pushed away.

  • Why do Wittgenstein use words to say that words mean 'no one thing'.

    He is using words and language to say that words and language mean diffrent things. Wittgenstein is contradicting himself.

  • What all these games have in common is: they are all games.

  • @Threeload When it comes to Wittgenstein, don't expect to be particularly illuminated by P.M.S. Hacker.

  • The facts do not stand on their own as they are independent of the viewer since use is in the eye of the beholder. We must get beyond our own sense of reality in order to see things as they are, and so the fundamental question of whether we can speak of anything, given that we are so biased in our interpretations of reality. We rationalize everything in our selfishness. What is the use of my viewing anything? Really. What is the use to which I will put what I see?

    rt87

  • It is a logical extension that tools would become a more apt metaphor since the eventuality of topological mathematics is that everything can be seen as everything else depending on the degree of rotation, inversion, whatever, and so the two stages of W.'s philosophy are merely a maturity of and not an abandonment of his earlier work. Use is another way of saying perception, using the dependency of operational control. This makes the viewer responsible for his interpretation.

    runningturtle87

  • @Threeload My thoughts precisely, I even just bought that same book.

  • wow that cliffhanger really hits you

    lol, on to part 3

View all Comments »
Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more