is anybody familiar with the philosopher wittgenstein??

Question

if so, are there any flaws in his private language argument?

also, the reason for his argument is to prove that other minds exist in order for language to be possible, an other reason is to argue against solipsism.

but i have a question. is language still impossible if the solipsist imagines other minds and then communicates with other minds? or id language only possible if there are other minds that are not your own? PLEASE HELP!

Answer 1

www.wikipedia.com...you should find your answer there.

Answer 2

I find Wittegenstein's thought extremely hard to summarize, but here goes... Wittgenstein asserts that language is by its very nature social. In his attack on private language he tried to show that it would be impossible for anyone to develop a language that was simply their own, one that you could not teach anyone else. Related to this are consequences for solipsism and extreme forms of scepticism-- the basis for which seems ruled out, according to Wittgenstein, because one must rely on a langauge in which to formulate one's arguments for solipsism. And since the condition for the possibility for language is outside the self, the arguments for solipsism seem to collapse.

As far as objections to this premise, one would have to demonstrate that a private language would be possible. But how would one do that? That is the real challenge. I don't think that it can be done, but there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in philosophy. So, perhaps it is possible. I don't know of anyone who has sufficently answered this challenge. So as far as I know, Wittegenstein's private language argument remains intact. Perhaps, someone else on this board might know of an answer to Wittgenstein's argument.

In terms of your possible objection to Wittgenstein's argument, I don't think that it will hold. The condition for the possibility for imagining minds other than your own would be the experience of other minds. From whence would this experience come? It would not come simply from within the individual, but would emanate from a set of social relationships, much like what Wittgenstein said about langauge itself. It is a good intellectual dilemna, but I don't think that your insight tarnishes Wittgenstein's argument. In fact, it simply leads back to the original argument he made against private language itself. It might be helpful to fine tune your question a bit.

Answer 3

So, you've read the Tratactus. Well, I haven't but will. 'Till then, I'll let you know.

Answer 4

Nope no clue