Wittgenstein (Language and Philosophy)

[mokomiki]

Hi friends!

I am reading David Pear's book on Wittgenstein, and I am having a hard time understanding what this sentence means when he references Wittgenstein.

The sentence is as followed:
"Similarly, in Philosophical Investigations he rejects the theory that we might have developed a language for reporting our sensations without the help of the language in which we describe the external world, on the ground that such a language would fail to meet a requirement that must be met by any language."

Where I am lost is, I can't tell apart the language used for reporting our sensations and language in which we describe the external world.

Can anybody help shed a light on this?

Thank you so much!

[ChiGeekGuest]

Originally Posted by mokomiki

Hi friends!

I am reading David Pear's book on Wittgenstein, and I am having a hard time understanding what this sentence means when he references Wittgenstein.

The sentence is as followed:
"Similarly, in Philosophical Investigations he rejects the theory that we might have developed a language for reporting our sensations without the help of the language in which we describe the external world, on the ground that such a language would fail to meet a requirement that must be met by any language."

Where I am lost is, I can't tell apart the language used for reporting our sensations and language in which we describe the external world.

Can anybody help shed a light on this?

Thank you so much!

I don't know if I can help with your inquiry? I sortof struggled with Mr. Wittgenstein's work but I was reading his own.

He said, “All I know is what I have words for.” This, imho, is very true of us all.

As this relates to the sentence you've quoted? I really don't know.

Think about how you would describe what a color would taste like.
Or how you would draw a sound or a piece of music.

& so on.

[Jill_Schramm]

I don’t for sure, but maybe this is part of his argument against private language, against the notion that an individual could make up their own language ex nihilo. Maybe the language in which we “report our sensations” would be this impossible private language and the language describing the external world, the possible social language.

Also, if you enjoy Wittgenstein, I would highly recommend the philosophy novel The World As I Found It, by Bruce Duffy.

[SamNacc]

Originally Posted by mokomiki

Hi friends!

I am reading David Pear's book on Wittgenstein, and I am having a hard time understanding what this sentence means when he references Wittgenstein.

The sentence is as followed:
"Similarly, in Philosophical Investigations he rejects the theory that we might have developed a language for reporting our sensations without the help of the language in which we describe the external world, on the ground that such a language would fail to meet a requirement that must be met by any language."

Where I am lost is, I can't tell apart the language used for reporting our sensations and language in which we describe the external world.

Can anybody help shed a light on this?

Thank you so much!

This is in reference to Wittgenstein's argument that a private language is impossible. In other words, meaning necessarily occurs in the social settings of language. There is no such thing as a private rule-governed activity, i.e., completely private according to Wittgenstein.

I may start a thread on Wittgenstein, but I'm not sure if there's much of an interest here.