table of contents

10/07/2015

Hans Sluga on the life and work of Wittgenstein

Hans Sluga is the William and Trudy Ausfahl Professor of Philosophy at UC-Berkeley, where he has taught since 1970. In addition to numerous essays, Professor Sluga has published various important books including “Gottlob Frege” (Routledge, 1980, later reprinted and translated into Chinese and Greek), “Heidegger's Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany” (Harvard University Press, […]

download transcript [vtt]
00:00:00.000
This is KZSU Stanford.
00:00:06.500
Welcome to entitled opinions.
00:00:08.540
My name is Robert Harrison and we're coming to you from the Stanford campus.
00:00:15.000
I'm entitled opinions began airing 10 years ago believe it or not and we're keeping it going here on KZSU for all you listeners.
00:00:44.900
Who rely on it as a kind of intellectual lifeline.
00:00:48.900
We don't know how many of you are out there and we don't know if all of you are even alive.
00:00:54.900
There are those who believe that radio is a spirit medium that can reach through to the other side and that the dead are attuned to some of its frequencies.
00:01:04.900
I'm down with that, it doesn't spook me in the least.
00:01:08.900
I wouldn't air a show that I wouldn't air if I knew for a fact that the dead were listening in.
00:01:15.900
That goes even for today's show which is devoted to the Austrian-born eccentric Ludwig Wittgenstein,
00:01:23.900
who many consider the greatest philosopher of the 20th century.
00:01:27.900
I don't share their opinion personally but I'll confess it's a little unnerving to imagine that Wittgenstein's ghost might be tuning into our program.
00:01:37.900
He was a severe judgmental and at times nasty human being and there's no reason to think he's changed much in his afterlife.
00:01:47.900
But that's all right we can handle Wittgenstein on entitled opinions.
00:01:52.900
[Music]
00:02:11.900
The song is Echo, the band is Glassway.
00:02:19.900
KZSU is best.
00:02:23.900
[Music]
00:02:33.900
It's a real pleasure to welcome back to entitled opinions, my friend and colleague Hans Sluga,
00:02:39.900
whom you may remember from the show he and I did on Michel Foucault a few years back.
00:02:45.900
April 18, 2012 to be exact.
00:02:49.900
Hans Sluga is a professor of philosophy at UC Berkeley,
00:02:53.900
author of several outstanding books and will be posting his full bio on our website.
00:02:59.900
But let me mention here only his two most recent publications.
00:03:04.900
One is on Wittgenstein called Wittgenstein, brought out by Wiley Blackwell in 2011.
00:03:11.900
The other goes by the title politics and the search for the common good.
00:03:17.900
That one came out in 2014 with Cambridge University Press.
00:03:21.900
These are two major books and what we've decided to do is to devote one show to each of them.
00:03:28.900
Today Professor Sluga will share with us his eminently entitled opinion about Wittgenstein,
00:03:33.900
the person, the philosopher and the ethical thinker.
00:03:37.900
We'll follow up with him very soon with another show about his fascinating new book politics and the search for the common good.
00:03:44.900
We have a lot of ground to cover with my guests, so let me welcome him to the show without further delay.
00:03:49.900
Hans is great to have you back on entitled opinions.
00:03:52.900
Thanks for coming down from the North Bay to join us here on KZSU.
00:03:56.900
Thank you all about for this generous introduction.
00:03:59.900
It's great to be back and I remember our wonderful discussion of Foucault.
00:04:03.900
I hope we can do the same with Wittgenstein.
00:04:05.900
Yes, one of the very popular shows of entitled opinions.
00:04:10.900
So let me begin by saying that Wittgenstein's personality was as complex as his philosophy and your book deals admirably,
00:04:18.900
really, in a way that I admire greatly with Wittgenstein, the philosopher, tracing with great lucidity, the meandering,
00:04:25.900
but steady course that his thinking followed from around 1911, 1912 until his death in 1951.
00:04:33.900
And in this show we'll have time to deal with only a few aspects of his thinking and also I hope a few aspects of his personality if we get a chance.
00:04:41.900
But let me begin with a broad question that you should feel free to take in whatever direction you want.
00:04:46.900
So when we did our show on Foucault, I quoted from your faculty webpage where you wrote the following.
00:04:53.900
I quote, "My overall philosophical outlook is radically historicist.
00:04:57.900
I believe that we can understand ourselves only as beings with a particular evolution and history.
00:05:03.900
For this reason I have been drawn to the work of Nietzsche and Foucault.
00:05:07.900
I am doubtful of the possibility of a pure a priori philosophizing in consequence.
00:05:14.900
I feel attracted to a realist and naturalistic view of things rather than any sort of formalistic rationalism."
00:05:24.900
So my question for you, Wittgenstein was anything but a historicist thinker, Alainicha Rifugault,
00:05:31.900
nor am I convinced that he had a realist or naturalistic view of things yet you seem to be fascinated with him.
00:05:39.900
Why?
00:05:40.900
Well, that's a great question to start with. In fact, you don't know how great the question is.
00:05:46.900
I am just in the process of doing a second edition of the Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein,
00:05:51.900
which I and my student David Stern edited and published 50 years ago already.
00:05:57.900
One of the most popular best-selling Cambridge companions of all, no?
00:06:03.900
Yes, it's been extremely successful and so the publisher wants us to do a second edition.
00:06:07.900
I took one of my own contribution out of the old edition and I'm writing now a piece called "Time and History in Wittgenstein".
00:06:16.900
It's a theme that hardly anybody has thought about very systematically and that seems to me nevertheless not surprisingly for my perspective, of course, of great importance.
00:06:26.900
So the point is that he starts off really not thinking about time at all in the Troctatus' first work.
00:06:34.900
There's hardly reference to time and history doesn't get mentioned at all in this work.
00:06:40.900
There is a wonderful sentence from the notebooks from which he extracted the Troctatus, 1916 in which he writes,
00:06:47.900
"What has history to do with me mine is the first and only world?"
00:06:52.900
And it's paradoxical and strange, of course he is a soldier in the war.
00:06:57.900
It's fighting in a great historical battle so what does this mean.
00:07:01.900
But I think the Troctatus represents that kind of worldview.
00:07:05.900
It's a kind of detached, timeless perspective on a world of static facts and their timeless logical relations roughly.
00:07:14.900
But he gets away from this and that's what fascinates me.
00:07:18.900
He gets beyond that point and there are really two important steps I think.
00:07:24.900
One of them is that instead of thinking about language as a system of representation,
00:07:29.900
he begins to think about it as a system of use and communication.
00:07:34.900
And he's quite clear, use and communication takes place in time.
00:07:38.900
So time becomes an essential category in his thinking about language.
00:07:44.900
And that is projected also into other areas like logic and mathematics.
00:07:49.900
He says, "We must give up thinking about mathematics as this crystalline-timeless structure
00:07:55.900
and think instead of actual processes of calculation and transformation and transition in mathematics."
00:08:04.900
So the first point is, use is meaning is use.
00:08:08.900
Second one is that he reads Osboch Beggler's famous and notorious book, The Decline of the West in the late 1920s.
00:08:16.900
And it opens his eyes to history.
00:08:19.900
And it's a picture of history where the historical process is divided,
00:08:26.900
divides into different cultures and periods.
00:08:29.900
Ages, each one has its own structure to it.
00:08:33.900
Culture proceeds from primitive beginnings to hardening to civilization.
00:08:39.900
And there are discrete and disjoment forms of culture.
00:08:43.900
So this cultural pluralism in historicism becomes greatly important for him.
00:08:49.900
It's something that he thinks through but comes to understand fully only very late in life in the late 1940s
00:08:57.900
in notes called uncertainty.
00:08:59.900
This picture of our understanding of the world as historical, as consisting of different world views,
00:09:06.900
which each has their own history and their own background,
00:09:09.900
that's something that he slowly develops.
00:09:11.900
So I want to say he's less an anti-estarist thinker than you suggest.
00:09:16.900
And the picture of these world views is a naturalistic one rather than a rationalistic and formalist one.
00:09:22.900
That's now we're talking about the later victim style of the world.
00:09:24.900
Later victim style.
00:09:25.900
Yeah, of course.
00:09:26.900
So before we trace the difference between the earlier or the later of maybe the middle,
00:09:31.900
even though in the early period in the tractate, he doesn't mention history,
00:09:36.900
time is not really the concern.
00:09:39.900
Nevertheless, he did live through some very important historical moment and was a soldier during the First World War.
00:09:49.900
He was also, as you've point out so persuasively in your book that he was paragmatic of his own historical time.
00:09:59.900
Can we first maybe...
00:10:02.900
Can you tell us something about how you see him as being so much belonging to his particular historical moment?
00:10:08.900
So when I look at the picture literature today, then I'm struck by how very, veryiable and various it is.
00:10:24.900
I mean, it's not only for philosophers who write about Wittgenstein, but cultural critics, cultural historians, people concerned with literature and music.
00:10:33.900
And in particular, of course, the history of late, the late Austro-Hungarian Empire and of Foreign de Sierco Vienna.
00:10:41.900
Wittgenstein was very much part of this cultural milieu, so was born in 1889.
00:10:48.900
And he grew up with people like Johannes Brahms and Gustav Mahler and Sigmund Freud,
00:10:57.900
Adolf Loes, the architect, Karl Kraus, the critic of culture, and so on.
00:11:02.900
And so on.
00:11:03.900
So Vienna was a very small world, and everybody knew everybody, and the Wittgenstein was very much part of this environment.
00:11:12.900
And so he reflects many of the attitudes.
00:11:15.900
For instance, this attraction has to show up in our... something that's deeply Viennese at the time.
00:11:20.900
This pessimism, what culture, something very Viennese.
00:11:24.900
And at the same time, this modernism that also appears in the work of Schoenberg and Mahler and Adolf Loes and Klimt, that too is very Viennese.
00:11:34.900
And so he represents this combination of this pessimistic look backwards to a world that is falling apart, but also a concern with a new world, modern world, which is one of logic and rationality and technology.
00:11:50.900
And indeed, his pessimism was quite extreme.
00:11:54.900
He believed that Europe was going into a dark age.
00:11:57.900
He believed that they're... well, I'm thinking now of a book of his was called Philosophical Remarks,
00:12:06.900
where maybe it was as a result, as you mentioned, of reading Spangler and the decline of the West,
00:12:10.900
but he has a preface there, and you draw attention to it in your book, where he says about philosophical remarks.
00:12:19.900
This book was written for such men as our Incympathy with its spirit.
00:12:23.900
This spirit is different from the one which informs the vast stream of European and American civilization in which all of us stand.
00:12:30.900
That spirit expresses itself in an onwards movement in building ever larger and more complicated structures.
00:12:37.900
The other, let me his spirit, in striving after clarity and perspicuity in matters, in no matter what structure.
00:12:45.900
And then he goes on to say that the first tries to grasp the world by way of its periphery and its variety, the second at its center in its essence.
00:12:54.900
So here he does seem to have a sense that European American civilization has been a long stream, and there's a kind of long history that adds layers and layers of complexity,
00:13:06.900
and that in a certain sense maybe his essentialistic thinking is trying to be the counter movement to that, to get back to a certain kind of clarity and simplicity that certainly characteristic of his early work and probably even his later work.
00:13:23.900
Yes, and so this sentiment gets repeated of course in the preface to the better non-full philosophical investigations where he says it's possible that his work will help to illuminate his time, but it's unlikely given the darkness of the time.
00:13:39.900
So he gets back again to this idea of the dark times in which we are living.
00:13:45.900
Yes, this pessimism is very powerful, but of course many philosophers ignore all this as a kind of sentiment surrounding the actual work and the concentrate on the formal aspects of the work.
00:13:57.900
So what he says about logic or language and meaning and forget about these cultural backgrounds that of cultural kind of motivations that we really get him going.
00:14:09.900
Do you see strong parallels if not convergences between something like the tractatus, the early work and the architectural, I don't know what the technical term for it is, but it would say architectural minimalism of Alfred Belose, for example.
00:14:26.900
And, you know, Bitcoin's sign himself got was involved in building a house there in Vienna with Engleman and was a student of Alfred Belose.
00:14:37.900
And there seems to be remarkable parallels between the two structures.
00:14:45.900
As Lose is certainly a very important figure in his life, he's a full runner of a house architecture and therefore of American modernist architecture, of course as well.
00:14:57.900
And he meets Lose, I forget exactly what the circumstances, he gets to know him personally and they kind of talk to each other, they write to each other, and there is this moment when Lose says you and me are the same.
00:15:10.900
And he's that because both of them were trying to get back to the essential, get away from ornamentation and almost not the atomic that would be Bitcoin science word, but the formalistic purity of in one case architecture and the other case formal logic.
00:15:28.900
Yes, there are certain kind of aesthetics they share, right? They made that the beautiful must manifest itself not in decoration attached to the front of the facades of houses, but it must express itself in the structural forms, in the relationships of the forms to each other.
00:15:45.900
And I think the talk to others wants to kind of elaborate that kind of an instantiate that kind of aesthetics as well. It's a work of literature as well as philosophy.
00:15:55.900
Well, let me say a little bit about my frustration with Bitcoin sign over many, many years where he just seems to me the archetype of the philosopher, he seems to fit into the notion of someone who inherited a great sum of money because his family was one of the richest families in Europe.
00:16:13.900
He gives it all away artists and other, and there are many periods in his life when he lived almost in a monkish way, gardening school teacher.
00:16:24.900
It seems like he embodied a wisdom, a philosophical understanding that is beyond me, and for years I've been trying to follow this promise that if I stick with him long enough, he's going to deliver some rich insight or some feast of the kind of things that he's going to deliver.
00:16:42.900
The wisdom or knowledge, but I've come to the conclusion that if there is such a feast, it's just not for me because I always come away from him hungry, whether it's the early Bitcoin sign or the later one.
00:16:57.900
It's because there's something about the austere, let's say, straight jacket that he begins with in philosophical.
00:17:09.900
That also has parallels with the house that he built in Vienna.
00:17:15.900
Let me quote what he said about his own house. He didn't sign the whole house. He only was responsible for certain aspects of it.
00:17:22.900
He says the house I built for Gretel is the product of a decisively sensitive ear and good manners and expression of great understanding, but primordial life, wild life starving to erupt into the open that is lacking.
00:17:38.900
It's that lack that he senses in his own house that I often sense when I read both the early Bitcoin sign above all, but sometimes also even the later philosophical investigation, not so with culture and value when he's speaking about religion and other things different.
00:17:58.900
Do you have a certain frustration with what I would call this overly inhibited manner of doing philosophy for those of us who are used to, for example, reading high-degenerable sats or the phenomenological tradition where they let it rip a little bit more?
00:18:18.900
Yes, I mean the austerity of Bitcoin-shats prose, of his thinking, of his lifestyle, both astonishing and frightening, I think, sometimes.
00:18:31.900
I'm almost ambiguous about this. I feel I'm a much more baroque personality. I'm open to lots of influences, lots of ideas, a much more dynamic way of seeing the world and wanting to see the world in dynamic terms.
00:18:47.900
But I think he represents a certain kind of thinking that is characteristic of a great deal of loss-fising.
00:18:56.900
He is, as I said, a kind of paradigmatic thinker of modernism, high modernism. I compare him to artists like Malavich, Kandinsky, the formalistic Kandinsky that is, or Mondrian.
00:19:12.900
I mean this idea of the reduction of aesthetic forms to simple straight lines and plain surfaces. That is something that appeals to him. He was broad, I was a Catholic, his family had a Jewish background.
00:19:26.900
But there is something very Protestant in the modernist Protestant way to this way of thinking.
00:19:34.900
Do I find this problematic? I never let us think. It tells us something about who we are in our own century and our own time. That's what's really really about it.
00:19:44.900
For sure. So can I ask a few follow-up questions on number one, "Shopenhauer"?
00:19:53.900
I was very impressed and convinced by what you write in your book that "Shopenhauer" was an influence on him all the way to the end.
00:20:01.900
And that he never, even though he had some critical remarks about "Shopenhauer" later, that the philosophical pessimism of "Shopenhauer" stays with him.
00:20:11.900
But also, "Shopenhauer" in the world is will and representation, making this distinction between what can be said and then something which is beyond language or beyond expression which would be associated with the aesthetic and the mystical.
00:20:28.900
And there is this drive towards the unsayable and the mystical already in the trek tatist, where of when can not speak there of, one should remain silent and that most of the things having to do with art and morality and so forth are beyond limits of representation,
00:20:48.900
whether it's formal, logical representation or other kinds of representation. And you see a strong, "Shopenhauer" in inheritance here.
00:20:58.900
That's certainly true. It's a point that hasn't been noted that much, but I think it's a key in some ways to understand it with "Shopenhauer" was very much widely read in "Late B&E's Culture".
00:21:11.900
He was of the philosopher that everybody had read. He also writes an extremely powerful and attractive prose. He's the teacher of nature in some ways, of course.
00:21:23.900
And, with which time we have heard, read as his first philosopher, "Shopenhauer".
00:21:31.900
In the 1930s, he gives us a list of the thinkers who have influenced him and "Shopenhauer" comes first.
00:21:38.900
When you read the truck tatist, you can see that if you have the eyes to look for it, of course, if you have read "Shopenhauer" himself.
00:21:46.900
And so the first sentence of the truck tatist is actually modeled on the first sentence of "Shopenhauer's Great Work, the World" as well in "representation" which "Shopenhauer" says, "The World" is my representation,
00:21:59.900
My idea, Wittgenstein says, "The World" is everything that is the case. This ambitious, over-embitious attempt to say something about the world as a whole and what it is is something unique and puzzling and that they share.
00:22:15.900
And they both end up taking back this initial proposition.
00:22:19.900
Wittgenstein says that, "Alto, what do we have to come with to see is propositions as senseless, we have to abandon them and where one cannot speak there of what must be silent, mystical silence ensues."
00:22:31.900
And this is exactly also where "Shopenhauer" ends up as well. He says, ultimately, it's the mistakes and their silence that we have to follow and we have to overcome these metaphysical incarnations.
00:22:44.900
We have to overcome the metaphysical world, as he puts it."
00:22:48.900
So do you believe that all that in the tractatus is beyond the limits of sensible, meaningful speech?
00:22:56.900
Was really Wittgenstein's primary concern, even though his logical atomism, if you want to call it, that for "bade him to speak of it?"
00:23:07.900
Well, I see a kind of developmental process in the tractatus, right? He reads "Shopenhauer" first before he really takes up philosophy seriously in a technical way.
00:23:18.900
Then he gets to know Russell. He works with Russell, and the early positive the tractatus kind of reflect a resilient ideas, very much in a resilient issues.
00:23:27.900
But we see from the notebooks how in the middle of the wall when he is composing the tractatus, he suddenly comes back to "Shopenhauer" in question about the meaning of life, and he quotes "Shopenhauer" at that point. He clearly re-reads them again at this point.
00:23:43.900
So I think there is a return from Russell and Freiger, the two great influences in this preceding period towards a back to "Shopenhauer."
00:23:53.900
And then he writes in 1929, he gives a lecture on ethics, which is one of the few pieces of writing which is deliberately devoted to ethics.
00:24:05.900
And there again, you think that "Shopenhauer" returns there in that essay, where "Shopenhauer" had written of the ambitions of philosophy that "to become practical to guide conduct, to deliver the kind of
00:24:23.860
transform character are old claims which, with mature insight, philosophy ought to finally abandon."
00:24:30.860
For here, what is a question of the worth or worthlessness of existence of salvation or damnation?
00:24:36.860
Not the dead concepts of philosophy decide the matter, but the innermost nature of man himself, the demon which guides him.
00:24:44.860
And you claim that that is how Wittgenstein ultimately understood the ethical as something that is inward and not normative.
00:24:55.860
It's not the Ten Commandments, it's not Kant's categorical imperative. It's not telling you what is how to act and what is right and what is wrong.
00:25:05.860
It's this sanctuary within a self that exists beyond the reach of the world of, let's say, the external world.
00:25:18.860
Yeah, so what I call "both "Shopenhauer and Wittgenstein's ethics" is a visionary ethics.
00:25:24.860
It's an attempt to see oneself and the world in a certain way, and that this one gives one an understanding of the meaning of one's existence.
00:25:35.860
That resolves the existential problem.
00:25:38.860
And so I think we should point out, of course, that "Shopenhauer" is the great forebear of Nietzsche, and through Nietzsche has an influence on the existential tradition.
00:25:48.860
In a certain way, the first existential philosopher was considerable in significance also for Heidegger.
00:25:55.860
So I see a sort of existentialist element in Wittgenstein's thinking appearing there through "Shopenhauer."
00:26:02.860
Well, it certainly seems very existential when, for example, when you quote, "I guess from his notebooks where he's in the trenches"
00:26:12.860
In World War I, saying, "I can die in one hour, I can die in two hours.
00:26:18.860
I can die in a month or only in a few years."
00:26:21.860
This seems very much like Heidegger's being under death, but in a very concrete situation.
00:26:26.860
And you write, "Living constantly under the gun, he is keenly aware that he may have no future ahead of him, and therefore he concludes, "Man must not depend on accident, neither on the favorable nor the unfavorable."
00:26:38.860
So then his question becomes, you say, "How must I live in order to persist at every moment, to live in the good and the beautiful and till life ends by itself?"
00:26:48.860
And this is what the ethical amounts to, in a sense, for Wittgenstein, because as he goes on to say, his own ethical experience is that of wonder at the existence of the world.
00:27:04.860
It's also the experience of this is, I'm intrigued by, feeling, absolutely safe, whatever may happen.
00:27:12.860
And finally, the experience of feeling guilty, not because of anything one is done, but absolutely an existentially guilty in the face of God.
00:27:21.860
So this would seem to put ethics in a very different sphere than one normally associates it with.
00:27:28.860
Not in the sphere of normative behavior and right and wrong, but this inward place of the self where one's being in the world takes on its own form.
00:27:40.860
Yes. So if one thinks of these three examples of the ethical that he gives in this lecture, one certainly wants to say, these are religious attitudes that I expressed there.
00:27:51.860
And the wonder of the world is thinking about creation, the creation of the world out of nothing, out of Xneelo, being completely safe is the salvation he talks about.
00:28:06.860
Yes, I think that he is talking about salvation and feeling guilty, whatever one does is original sin.
00:28:13.860
These are, I want to say not only Christian, but deeply Catholic sentiments he expresses in this fashion here.
00:28:21.860
Yeah, it's so good because we're seeing oneself in relation to the world as a whole.
00:28:27.860
That's what ethics is really about and thereby finding a meaning in one's life.
00:28:33.860
I was tempted to read that thing about feeling absolutely safe as if I can in these trenches with all the bombs going around.
00:28:40.860
If I can achieve clarity about life, about the limits of language, if I can get to this fill, if I can resolve the philosophical quandaries that have been afflicting me and the history of metaphor, then I can feel completely safe because I achieved what he calls that clarity and persecuity that he speaks about in the preface.
00:29:02.860
But I think now you've persuaded me that he's probably talking about the absolute safety of salvation, whatever would happen.
00:29:10.860
Yes, so in this, what I've known about books becomes clear that he's also quite strongly drawn on Tolstoy and Tolstoy's Christianity.
00:29:18.860
And there the word safe is sometimes replaced by the word saved.
00:29:23.860
Saved.
00:29:24.860
I'm saved in the way.
00:29:26.860
So Christians always saved by this confidence in salvation.
00:29:31.860
And then there's that feeling of guilt.
00:29:33.860
Yes.
00:29:34.860
The absolute guilt is almost like primordial guilt.
00:29:37.860
Do you think that Wittgenstein suffered greatly from a sense of guilt for which behavior was not the issue?
00:29:49.860
It was just almost like existential ontological condition.
00:29:53.860
Yes, definitely, but he's not the only one who suffers from this.
00:29:57.860
It's deeply built into the Christian ideology.
00:30:01.860
And it's also even more strongly something felt by Viennese people in the late 19th century.
00:30:09.860
It leads throughout, to signify this feeling of anxiety, this neurotic sense as a deeply profoundly human phenomenon that needs treatment.
00:30:21.860
So it's no accident that there is a connection between Freud and Wittgenstein.
00:30:25.860
He calls himself at some point a student and disciple of Freud even.
00:30:30.860
Right.
00:30:31.860
He rejects Freud's theories, he thinks Freud's conception of the self as sort of always in a state of anxiety and needing to be released from that is precisely what human life and what philosophy is about.
00:30:44.860
So if we can move on to some of the fundamental concepts of the philosophical investigations, which is the latter part of his career, in our philosophical reading group, which has been going on at Stanford for a long time, when Dick Rowdy was still alive, we had a reading group on the philosophical investigations.
00:31:03.860
And many of us, nourished on the continental tradition, existentialism, said, we were trying to figure out what the big deal was in the philosophical investigations that it didn't seem either to be so surprising what Wittgenstein was pursuing to discover, nor particularly interesting.
00:31:24.860
And Richard Rowdy said, if you haven't suffered from the disease, then you don't need the cure.
00:31:32.860
But many of us who were nourished in the analytic philosophical tradition caught that disease, which is believing that language and logic were, as Wittgenstein had described in the tractatus, and therefore Wittgenstein needed to be cured from his earlier misconceptions.
00:31:53.860
But I suppose I find it hard-seen language, and when he says the world is all that is the case, my hydrogarions, and he says, "What do you mean by world? What does being in a world mean? And is there a world without design? Is there an oomveld surrounding world? Is there also a larger cause?"
00:32:18.860
Do you agree that the philosophical investigations have their most value in terms of a therapy for those who are sympathetic with the kind of philosophy that the tractatus is a great manifesto or testimony?
00:32:35.860
You can certainly say that the book is first of all a kind of self-diagnosis, right? He's looking back at his own early reviews and now taking the part and trying to show what was wrong with him.
00:32:48.860
But the views of language and meaning and language as a system of representation with a very precisely defined deep structure which we must bring and can bring out is a picture of language that is still very much around.
00:33:02.860
So he's not only a diagnostic himself, not only diagnosing a philosophical view held by people like Frager and Russell earlier on and earlier self, but it's also one which is still deeply embedded in our culture.
00:33:17.860
So I would say what he is attacking is for instance a picture of language as it has been developed by Norm Chomsky more recently and there are many linguists who hold that the Chomsky picture of there being deep structures which we can identify maybe universal deep structures in language is still very much around.
00:33:37.860
Universal deep structures is a language I cannot take very seriously is the correspondence theory of truth that you have in the tractatus where you have propositions that have to have the same logical form as the facts that they represent and the facts are things in the world, events in the world can catch nations.
00:34:05.860
And for me I think in 1912 I was reading there was a Cambridge moral sciences club and Wittgenstein gave a four minute paper in 1912 where he defined philosophy and I'm quoting all those primitive propositions which are assumed to be true without proof by the various sciences.
00:34:26.860
And I say to myself oh my that's for me applies so well to the tractatus you get all these propositions that are stated apodictically and they are told and not shown and they don't seem to have any proof for he doesn't feel under the obligation to prove any of them.
00:34:50.860
So the question you're absolutely right that many philosophers academic philosophers of our own time are still caught up in the in the in the view that you get in the picture theory of meaning and so forth.
00:35:06.860
Why have they not been persuaded by reading the philosophical investigations that they are utterly wrong about that.
00:35:15.860
So that's a very good question for which I really don't have a full answer what is I think what shows itself above all is how strong our drive towards theory is right both in philosophy and outside philosophy.
00:35:30.860
We obviously there must be somewhere even if we haven't got it right now there must be somewhere a complete comprehensive theory of everything and that's what we are striving for and what Wittgenstein the later Wittgenstein tries to convince us of that's a mistake right.
00:35:45.860
What we have indeed instead is a world in which we live with certain human practices which we have acquired in a completely natural and historical fashion and we maneuver and manage more or less adequately in there and sometimes that expresses itself in some theory in bit of theory but the assumption that there is a theory for everything is a mistake and a mistake that he felt he was himself engaged in in his earlier work.
00:36:14.860
So he says very interesting things about the drug tardis later on he says firstly it's a piece of complete dogmatism.
00:36:21.860
Everything is a dogmatic assertion in it.
00:36:24.860
Second he said every proposition that it is like the heading of a title of a chapter in other words it doesn't spell out any details it just puts very large claims before as it leaves them there and the third one is the mostly tree one he said every one of the propositions is the symptom of a disease.
00:36:42.860
So he completely abandoned all this and tried to fashion a completely new form of thinking and of course he was convinced that he got to the later thinking only by having gone through the fire of this earlier philosophizing.
00:36:58.860
Because the later thinking conceives of itself as a therapy.
00:37:02.860
Not changing the world but but as a cure a healing process.
00:37:06.860
That's where Freud comes into that's where he takes this metaphor of the therapeutic from right so in Freud we are we have certain neurotic feelings and the analyst helps us to describe them to identify them and thereby they dissolve they maybe get displaced and you
00:37:25.860
you know you wrote as a PSM or else they need them to be described and analyzed and so the picture of the philosopher now becomes someone likes this he is concerned with philosophical confusions and trying to therapeutically dissolve these confusions which however may manifest themselves in new ways in some other place.
00:37:45.860
So he was very much against theory and he did do a lot to dismantle theories to get back to the essence so deconstruction would be the wrong word to use in his in his.
00:37:59.860
I'm perfectly happy to to call him I am to say the truck status isn't some sense already the first deconstructive piece of philosophy.
00:38:07.860
Yeah because I would say then that the what he says in the philosophical remark in the preface about having to get back to the center and go against the current of a European American civilization which has constructed more and more complex structures.
00:38:23.860
And that philosophy philosophical theories metaphysical theories need to also be dismantled and get back where he says that philosophy has to return to the center of our true needs to get back to this essence and that would involve a kind of deconstruction of.
00:38:41.860
And clarification of the way we use words so.
00:38:46.860
In that in that respect if you haven't again as Dick Roy said if you haven't suffered from the disease maybe you don't need that particular form of therapy although we do need philosophy.
00:38:57.860
I believe to get us back to the center of our true needs and what those true needs are he's not very.
00:39:06.860
He's not very let's say expansive but what I admire so much about your book is that your last chapter refuses just to give us an intelligent summary of the coherence of.
00:39:20.860
But you say well okay there are certain things there in this corpus that will have a great deal of relevance to something that bit can sign never engaged in himself which is the political.
00:39:38.860
You draw out the possible part of some of the main concepts of the philosophical investigations above all for what would amount to a project of a creative retrieval of Wittgenstein and a repurgation of his thinking in a new sphere.
00:39:58.860
And here these are concepts that have to do with his understanding of language what he means by a form of life.
00:40:08.860
What he means by a language game and the application of rules can you speak a little bit more about what you were up to in that final chapter of your book.
00:40:18.860
Yes, so let me begin with one for quote from one of his collaborators and friends Luke McVise one for the vice-man sorry.
00:40:28.860
And vice-man was a mathematician and he wanted to kind of write down in a systematic way of Wittgenstein's ideas about mathematics.
00:40:37.860
And so they would get together every week and they would discuss the issue of vice-man would go home write it down bring it back to Wittgenstein and Richard Shabbat said no no wrong wrong wrong we have to start over again.
00:40:48.860
vice-man at the end said it was impossible to write this book because he tears everything down that he had previously built up.
00:40:54.860
I see Wittgenstein the whole Wittgenstein really very much in the light of this this idea.
00:40:59.860
I mean that he is a constantly reconstructive and but also deconstructive in destructive thinker.
00:41:07.860
And so for me learning from Wittgenstein doesn't mean to repeat and work out in more detail what he has already told us but rather to ask yourself what is the next step of destruction and construction.
00:41:20.860
That's the first thought the second one is what interest me in Wittgenstein is I think he's such a great singer like how to go or play or can't or they can't.
00:41:30.860
And so he is that he really wants to identify the deepest and most pressing problems that exist for him and battle with those.
00:41:39.860
And I want to say those problems that he worried about are no longer our deepest problems.
00:41:45.860
So the foundations of mathematics was a deep problem at the beginning of the 20th century because there was a crisis in mathematics that has long passed.
00:41:54.860
And we need to ask ourselves what are our deepest problems and these are really the problems of our social and political existence I say.
00:42:02.860
So we need to rethink Wittgenstein and what we can do what we can learn from him by looking at these questions.
00:42:09.860
And that's taking Wittgenstein and Wittgenstein in concept in a direction which of course he didn't at all anticipate and which however we maybe can do something new.
00:42:19.860
Yeah, but this is a heidegger's retrieval which is not repetition in the mechanical sense that you repeat I think or thought but you give it new life by bringing out potential future legacies of it.
00:42:42.860
And I agree with you that you are what you do in that last chapter is bring Wittgenstein sinking around the center of our true needs in our particular historical moment which is in the early 21st century where the political or namely how can we live with one another.
00:43:03.860
This is the crucial issue of our how can we all live together human beings with human beings but even human beings with nature and that's how I understand the political.
00:43:18.860
So could you get a little bit more specific when you discuss things like words or rules and how you think one can make that transfer into the political sphere.
00:43:32.860
So there are of course other people who have thought in this direction before me one of the mosquito winch who in late 1950s I think already wrote a book called the very idea of the social science.
00:43:46.860
And what he did was to use Wittgenstein's thinking about language and use and meaning as a critique of the idea of social science.
00:43:58.860
Our understanding of the social world can't be can't take the form of the scientific theory of the kind that we have in physics or chemistry.
00:44:07.860
I feel sympathetic to that so I also think that is one of which which does important contributions as a critic of this idea of scientific theory of society politics.
00:44:20.860
Then later there was David Blur, Scotsman who wrote about Wittgenstein and a social theory of knowledge seeing that our human understanding is in fact social phenomenon and has to be understood and interpreted in these ways.
00:44:37.860
And I think that is again right. And then my Berkeley colleague Hannah Pittkin wrote a book called Wittgenstein and justice in which he did already ask this question what can Wittgenstein tell us about politics and what she focused on was how he is so concerned with concepts that we take our concepts for granted.
00:44:57.860
We give him an essentialist interpretation we think that the essence we identify with and what we see is that these concepts have a much more complex structure and a complex use and there Wittgenstein can help us essentially in thinking about such issues.
00:45:13.860
Hannah Pittkin also she wrote this book about Wittgenstein she also wrote a book on the concept of representation and saying look we have this very simple minded idea of what is political representation but we need to kind of dissect this concept and this I think was done in a deeply Wittgensteinian spirit.
00:45:32.860
And you think Wittgenstein can help there specifically. Well certainly the idea of concepts as expressing family resemblance is an important one so I do want to say that there is no such thing as politics as politics has no single essence.
00:45:51.860
It's really a field of related activities and institutions and structures and people relating to each other in manifold ways and therefore there is also no such thing as the common good because how we understand the good in a particular situation will change because the nature of the political changes.
00:46:15.860
That's that leads over of course to my next book. Yes and we're going to talk about your textbook and the next installment because this last chapter actually is almost like a preface to the next book.
00:46:25.860
It was almost written as that actually was I was working at on both books at the same time.
00:46:31.860
But to remain within this last chapter of yours. You mentioned that between theory and practice it can be like the relationship between astronomy and the cosmos that maybe you can map something but no matter what we do in astronomy it was not going to change what so ever the.
00:46:50.860
Configuration of solar systems or galaxies or super clusters of galaxies. And that one of the problems in political theory is that is there any kind of theory that will have any efficacy as in terms of action within the political sphere.
00:47:09.860
So there the question would be that if Wittgenstein can help us clarify concepts and some confusion surrounding our concept of representation for example, or what we mean by the good or the common good or why the political is not just a.
00:47:26.860
It doesn't have an essence but it's a whole set of practices and life forms of life and language games and even if we gain the utmost clarity that we didn't have before would that still have any.
00:47:43.860
Direct intervention in the political itself or would we still be like astronomers mapping out something that exists on its own right.
00:47:53.860
Well, if Wittgenstein has anything to tell us about politics it would be at the methodological level how to think about it. But get me back let me get back to this this idea of astronomy versus social science right so this stars move quite independently of what series we have about them.
00:48:13.860
But when we look at the social world of course it turns out that the ways we see this social world is itself part of the social world.
00:48:22.860
Strange enough and therefore if our thinking it's changed changes about the social world that changes also the social reality itself so that's that's I think the idea lying behind the usefulness of such a bit good shiny analysis.
00:48:38.860
For sure, but here we can go back to the Wittgenstein's idea of a language game which is his way of naming a context a social.
00:48:49.860
Cultural context in which the use of words take on meaning and frankly we in academia.
00:48:59.860
We speak a language that is part of a language game it's one among a whole plurality of them.
00:49:09.860
And unfortunately often we just speak among ourselves because our words are not transitive no matter how much we may clarify for ourselves and complexify the notion of the political and representation and so forth.
00:49:22.860
Only rarely does it get beyond the walls of academia and and therefore I hear what you're saying that the way we think about something as a as a group actually changes the society that we live in.
00:49:37.860
But we might be changing will we be doing more than changing our own academic community and the way in which we use our language games here in academia or because that's what we're always frustrated by know as thinkers intellectuals we feel on the margins and that there's a certain factlessness about our own.
00:49:57.860
What's the clarification of complex issues in the political sphere.
00:50:01.860
Well let me go back to to a high-deco home we have mentioned before.
00:50:05.860
He once said and I thought this was a wonderful sentence he said questioning is the piety of thinking that is if we really ask ourselves what's the point of why why is thinking important as philosophical thinking.
00:50:20.860
suggest that it consists in this asking of questions and in the realization
00:50:25.720
that we don't necessarily have an answer in remaining within the question as
00:50:30.320
something questionable right and I think Wittgenstein has something similar to
00:50:35.800
offer. He at some point said, it should be possible to write a book of philosophy
00:50:39.840
consisting of nothing but questions right? It has no answer at all. It only has
00:50:44.760
these questions and it leaves the questions there and it leaves you to
00:50:47.340
grapple with these questions. So I sometimes say to my students what you
00:50:52.600
should realize is that philosophy is not systematic theorizing what it has
00:50:57.420
contributed to human knowledge is the question mark. And it is true of
00:51:04.520
course that in politics we ask questions all the time but we are also always
00:51:08.680
full of convictions which we can't really back up and which we fight for quite
00:51:15.200
irrationally against all good questioning and so the philosophy providing us
00:51:23.060
with this questioning spirit does something absolutely central not only to
00:51:28.520
politics but to human life I think that's what it does right? No I hear
00:51:33.800
your hands and I'm a little conflicted because I understand the piety of
00:51:40.240
thought being in questioning and I understand that I would not never
00:51:45.280
myself read a book of philosophy that's only questions and in fact when I
00:51:49.000
when I breed sometimes philosophers who start multiplying question after
00:51:53.520
question after question I I lose my patience I actually like it when or I
00:52:02.920
believe philosophy is under an obligation to posit and to affirm and to take a
00:52:10.860
stance because otherwise you are like Hegel's skeptic as he says in the
00:52:17.440
preface of the terminology of spirit that the skeptic or we could say the
00:52:21.760
questioner if all if we conceive of the vocation of philosophy only as a
00:52:27.000
questioning then it always then it has to have something to question therefore
00:52:30.840
it's parasitical of that which it's questioning and it as Hegel says skepticism is
00:52:38.400
the result of maybe some dogmatic assertions and I'm not sure that we can do
00:52:44.120
without not a dogmatic philosophy but something that Wittgenstein
00:52:49.200
associated with what he called faith as opposed to wisdom something that has a
00:52:53.520
fervent commitment or what your colleague at Berkeley Bert Dreyfuss when he was
00:53:01.880
speaking about you know the internet and any and invoking Kierkegaard's notion
00:53:06.560
of an infinite passion if we do not have an infinite passion or an unconditional
00:53:10.560
commitment to something a principle or a faith or a belief or some
00:53:16.520
call it even a dogma then our questioning will just be nothing but an endless
00:53:24.360
kind of bad infinity in the Hegelian sense that's what I worry about if we
00:53:30.520
reduce philosophy only to the act of questioning you see I don't know if that
00:53:34.480
well I maybe I'm less skeptical about skepticism than you or my colleague
00:53:39.340
Bert Dreyfuss I think we have as human beings we have such a tendency to believe
00:53:45.400
things to be dogmatic about things to be completely convinced that philosophy this
00:53:51.480
skeptical questioning as an antidote is an important contribution that
00:53:56.040
philosophy makes to human life I would also say it is the
00:54:00.320
Socratic contribution to human life in my Cambridge companion in the
00:54:05.720
introductory essay I end up comparing Wittgenstein to Socrates and I
00:54:10.240
think that's how you should read him I know that I know nothing but I'm
00:54:14.760
questioning myself and others and of course in this process hopefully truth will
00:54:21.160
emerge but the truth will be subjected to new questioning and we don't
00:54:25.480
kind of want to and should not want to shut this off too early oh no no I
00:54:31.080
I think it needs to go on in a very vigorous and healthy manner but at the
00:54:35.920
same time if Plato had not posited certain truths that have that are in need of
00:54:41.560
question for example a equating beauty with truth and truth with goodness and
00:54:46.200
or saying of positing some kind of ideal beauty of world of forms and so
00:54:51.320
forth and our questioning will dry up very quickly if it feeds only on its
00:54:57.000
own questioning so I think philosophy needs both the that spirit of
00:55:01.400
skepticism as well as the the spirit of taking the risk of committing
00:55:07.080
of embracing some kind of faith in the secular sense of of a faith existential
00:55:16.360
commitment yeah so to get back to Wittgenstein I would say that one I mean
00:55:20.840
there are many controversies around the question how to read them and he's
00:55:25.720
read in many different ways but one one line of course is to read him as a
00:55:29.560
skeptic essentially that's what what has been contribution to philosophies he
00:55:33.720
tears down rather establishes anything and even the thesis that meaning is
00:55:38.840
use is not a theory it's a kind of a destruction of the attempt to say what
00:55:45.080
meaning really is because uses come in so many different ways there's really no
00:55:50.040
way in which we can spell it out in advance but there are others who find that
00:55:54.840
he is after all advancing some positive view and they want to kind of extract
00:56:01.240
certainly there seems evident in the talk titles but even in the
00:56:05.480
investigations were can set out and try to extract a theoretical
00:56:09.800
substructure and so there are writings of Wittgenstein which try to
00:56:14.280
reconstruct and systematize the view of language meaning life
00:56:19.080
the mind that that he advances so I'd so he the texts are very elusive at
00:56:25.880
times as you know right there but he puts things before us and often he leaves it to
00:56:30.600
us to kind of make our mind how we are supposed to respond at this point
00:56:36.680
and so they open themselves up to to more than one reading and we need to
00:56:40.920
kind of of course battle this out right now
00:56:44.360
now I agree with you there and then that one statement of his which I quoted
00:56:48.200
that philosophy needs to return to the center around which our needs
00:56:52.200
revolve that opens up the question of what are our needs and
00:56:56.440
and our needs are and now we're going back to the first question with which we
00:57:00.840
opened our show namely how do things stand in the in the
00:57:06.520
historicist reading of Wittgenstein our needs as you point out historically
00:57:11.640
evolve they change and we always have to be able to identify what is the
00:57:17.080
need of the moment of our of our world at present and that philosophy has to
00:57:22.120
respond to that and now as I agree with you we're we're in our greatest need
00:57:26.920
is something that falls loosely under this this word the political which
00:57:30.840
in our the next installment that we're going to do on your on your book the
00:57:34.600
political and the search for the common good that we're going to ask
00:57:37.960
what exactly does the political mean what is a common good
00:57:41.720
and we're going to do it in a spirit of questioning but without forgetting the
00:57:45.880
fact that there are real needs here that are beyond just language games in
00:57:54.120
in the kind of demodics sense of games though that we're doing more than just
00:57:57.480
playing around so I certainly think that Wittgenstein never really becomes
00:58:03.880
historical historically oriented thinker in the way in which
00:58:07.800
Heidegger for instance did on Nietzsche and many others and but he thought
00:58:14.360
about this question of history certainly so he's he starts off as I suggested at
00:58:18.840
the beginning in a in a strictly anti-historical stance and then he
00:58:23.240
modifies this and opens himself up to he but he doesn't become a
00:58:28.440
historicist I I'm a historicist I think he has our needs and problems the
00:58:33.240
fundamental problems change over time I think his work
00:58:37.240
relies much more on the idea that they are certain stable set permanent
00:58:41.480
questions about the mind-body problem let's say which always come back and
00:58:46.360
which we then need to always to think about so so there I go beyond him
00:58:50.520
definitely right and open myself up to a more
00:58:54.920
varying an open-ended view of what philosophy is or should be
00:58:59.160
that's what makes your book on Wittgenstein so special which I highly
00:59:01.800
recommend all our listeners just called Wittgenstein
00:59:04.440
by Hans Slougas so I want to remind our listeners we've been speaking with
00:59:07.640
Professor Hans Slougas from the University of Berkeley and that this is
00:59:11.080
the first of two shows it's going to be followed up with a discussion of his
00:59:18.200
more recent book published in 2014 called Politics or the Search for the
00:59:22.280
Common Good and the Search for the Common Good
00:59:26.120
I am not my title the the publisher wanted it was that right Cambridge
00:59:29.720
University Press wanted it title well it's it works it works it
00:59:33.480
is a good title and it attracts a lot of attention and it's been getting a
00:59:37.800
lot of attention so we're definitely looking forward to having you on very very
00:59:42.680
shortly Hans for a follow-up discussion on that I want to remind our
00:59:47.080
listeners that this is Robert Pocherson for entitled opinions and that we're
00:59:51.320
going to be with you next week thanks again for coming on Hans thank you
00:59:54.200
- I feel good.
00:59:55.540
(upbeat music)
00:59:58.120
(bell dings)
01:00:00.700
(upbeat music)
01:00:03.280
(bell dings)
01:00:05.700
(upbeat music)
01:00:08.120
(bell dings)
01:00:10.120
(bell dings)
01:00:12.620
(bell dings)
01:00:15.120
(bell dings)
01:00:17.620
(bell dings)
01:00:20.120
(bell dings)
01:00:21.120
(bell dings)
01:00:22.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:25.120
(bell dings)
01:00:26.120
(bell dings)
01:00:27.120
(bell dings)
01:00:29.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:32.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:35.120
(bell dings)
01:00:38.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:41.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:44.120
(bell dings)
01:00:47.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:50.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:53.120
(upbeat music)
01:00:56.120
Hm.
01:00:56.960
There we go.
01:01:01.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:01:09.800
(upbeat dance music)
01:01:19.160
(upbeat dance music)
01:01:26.860
♪ Such a fun truth of fun ♪
01:01:30.860
♪ Yeah, yeah, runnin' ♪
01:01:33.180
♪ My children tellin' ♪
01:01:35.180
♪ I don't know love 'em ♪
01:01:38.540
♪ Certain number deaths to me ♪
01:01:43.540
♪ If I'm alive ♪
01:01:48.700
♪ Think that I was the boy ♪
01:01:52.740
♪ I'm now reflected in a different life ♪
01:01:56.900
♪ Better see the love ♪
01:02:00.380
♪ And look to the panel ♪
01:02:03.380
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:06.540
♪ Come on out over to the corner please ♪
01:02:12.820
♪ I'm also sleeping by the hoodie ♪
01:02:21.420
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:24.420
♪ This one love ♪
01:02:28.020
♪ Such a fun truth of fun ♪
01:02:32.220
♪ Step one I thought was peace and love ♪
01:02:36.420
♪ It was only me ♪
01:02:39.820
♪ I'm sleeping by reality ♪
01:02:43.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:46.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:49.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:52.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:55.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:02:58.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:01.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:04.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:07.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:10.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:13.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:16.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:19.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:22.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:25.620
(upbeat dance music)
01:03:28.620
(upbeat dance music)