did wittgenstein adress the mind and body problem issue correctly??

Question

i heard his works realy help to refute or at least show solipsism and cartesian skepticism inconsistent and shows its internal contradictions. if so in with one of his work did he show this?

i mean arent there tools to hel p elleviate some of the anxiety posed by the 2 ideas?

BTW: I ONLY WANT ANSWER FROM PEOPLE THAT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT. ALOT ON HERE HAVE EITHER N OT STUDIED PHILOSOPHY OR HAVE THERE INFO WRONG

Answer 1

You obviously want a scholarly,definitive answer then.

Doubt you will find any such thing in his writings;
And you should get more words than you bargained-
for with his converts.
This is probably due to his academic prominence-
an in-breeding,which we know is not correct.

Answer 2

The goal of philosophy is to make a determination. Metaphysics is as the determination that is made. Philosophy and metaphysics taken together make a determination that is of the self and yet is separate from the self. Making a determination means coming to the end.

Answer 3

Ludwig Wittgenstein regarded "doing philosophy" as using language to frame questions so as to untangle their ambiguities.

Having so done, Wittgenstein cedes the philosophic ground on one front to Karl Popper, in terms of analysis of problematics, and on another front to Edmund Husserl, in terms of understanding Nous, Self, and Physis. The conclusion Wittgenstein tends toward is one of human being in a Heideggerian mode of "Dasein," a kind of Kantian phenomena-naturalness, or world as "5-sense data stream given." Wittgenstein's "...whereof on cannot speak..." directly refers to Kant's somewhat-limited, 5-sense "naive realist" and psychologistic notion re any "future metaphysics."

Therefore, Wittgenstein addresses the "psyche/physis" or "mind/body" issue as a reductive naturalist: by framing philosophic questions in clear language, their various vectors are parsable.

This approach is mathematically infinitely regressive, as NP-complete formulations involving realistic numbers of variables in any given human issue are uncomputable. Also, assigning values to any such set of vectors implies Goedelian incompleteness or uncertainty re the self-consistent and self-evidential qualia constituting "proofs" of such axiomized valuations.

Hence, Wittgenstein's contributions include explaining to Vienna Circle positivists that their fundamental axiom was flawed (see preceding sentence as indicating the general schema of this fallacy), encouraging graduate students of philosophy to take up more useful vocations, and in general to live a more humane life.

If one prefers to follow a naturalistic philosophy in the manner of Wittgenstein's common sense, would suggest "A Philosophy of Universality," O. M. Aivanhov. If one prefers to contemplate further issues of Nous, would suggest Husserl's "Experience and Judgment." Popper's works such as "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" encourage problem-solving.

As to the limitations of Popper, would suggest Dr. William A. Tiller's "Psychoenergetic Science," http://www.tiller.org as an example of state-specificity which requires more awareness on the part of the scientist-observer-problem solver, than e.g. what Kant opined most scientists would be willing to essay.

best regards,

j.

Answer 4

I highly doubt it. The guy could barely address an envelope correctly.