Some Strands of Wittgenstein’s Normative Pragmatism, and Some Strains of his Semantic Nihilism
Abstract
In this reflection I address one of the critical questions this monograph is about: How to justify proposing yet another semantic theory in the light of Wittgenstein’s strong warnings against it. I see two clear motives for Wittgenstein’s semantic nihilism. The first one is the view that philosophical problems arise from postulating hypothetical entities such as “meanings”. To dissolve the philosophical problems rather than create new ones, Wittgenstein suggests substituting “meaning” with “use” and avoiding scientism in philosophy together with the urge to penetrate in one's investigation to unobservable depths. I believe this first motive constitutes only a weak motive for Wittgenstein’s quietism, because there are substantial differences between empirical theories in natural sciences and semantic theories in philosophy that leave Wittgenstein’s assimilation of both open to criticism. But Wittgenstein is right, on the second motive, that given the dynamic character of linguistic practice, the classical project of semantic theory is a disease that can be removed or ameliorated only by heeding the advice to replace concern with meaning by concern with use. On my view, this does not preclude, however, a different kind of theoretical approach to meaning that avoids the pitfalls of the Procrustean enterprise Wittgenstein complained about.
References
Brandom, Robert B. (2011). “From German Idealism to American Pragmatism –and Back.” In: Perspectives on Pragmatism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Brandom, Robert B. (2008). Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.7202/039727ar
Brandom, Robert B. (2015). From Empiricism to Expressivism: Brandom Reads Sellars. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674735569
Peirce, C. S. (1992 and 1999). The Essential Peirce (two volumes edited by the Peirce edition project). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Quine, Willard van Orman (1951). “Two dogmas of empiricism”, reprinted in Quine: From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. pp. 20–46. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2273406
Schneider, Hans Julius (2013) Wittgenstein’s Later Theory of Meaning: Imagination and Calculation. London: Wiley–Blackwell.
Sellars, Wilfrid (1997). Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.
Sellars, Wilfrid (1958). “Counterfactuals, Dispositions, and the Causal Modalities” in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume II: Concepts, Theories, and the Mind–Body Problem, edited by Herbert Feigl, Michael Scriven, and Grover Maxwell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 225–308, §79. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2270811
Stanley, Jason (2013). Know How. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, Mark (2006). Wandering Significance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wittgensgtein, Ludwigc(1961). Tractatus Logico Philosophicus. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Wittgensgtein, Ludwig (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Translation by G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Copyright (c) 2019 Disputatio. Philosophical Research Bulletin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.