notion of which is constant and uniform following a certain rule, such that this line A review of Saul A. Kripke, Wittgenstein: On Rules and Private Language. 68), ‘The impossibility of private language emerges as a What is it to grasp the rule of addition?. book by philosopher of language Saul Kripke, in which he contends that the Kripke ex- presses doubts in Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Lan- guage as to .

Author: Dailmaran Fek
Country: Ukraine
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Travel
Published (Last): 23 May 2016
Pages: 477
PDF File Size: 15.51 Mb
ePub File Size: 15.44 Mb
ISBN: 885-9-65133-742-8
Downloads: 84370
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kishicage

And the contending parties share the assumption that the conflict is genuine.

Saul A. Kripke, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language – PhilPapers

What Kripke means by this comparison with a Humean problem is that Wittgenstein is questioning the nexus between a past act of meaning and subsequent practice in a way analogous to that in which Hume questions the causal nexus between a single past event and a subsequent one. Views Read Edit View history.

If you mean this piece of chalk as a physical object, then you are not using a proper name.

It is conceptually even if not psychologically possible that a lifelong Crusoe i. After all, the skeptic reasons, by hypothesis you have never added numbers greater than 50 languaage. Oxford University Press, 99— These uses are often very different from what we would expect—hence the impression that truth-conditions are lacking—and it is a matter of some philosophical difficulty to see them clearly.

Although Wittgenstein does not explicitly say so, it is likely that this is the inspiration of his argument: Alison Gopnik – – Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 1: And what he means by a Humean solution is that there is a corresponding analogy between ;rivate ways in which Hume and Wittgenstein handle their respective problems.


In PI a Wittgenstein explicitly states the rule-following paradox: See Fogelin [], pp.

Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language – Wikipedia

For a detailed account, the reader is referred to Canfield [] to which this section is krpike, and which also contains a useful wtitgenstein of the debate over the community viewand to Hacker []. Sign in to use this feature. But this idea seems especially difllcult to reject in two sorts of eases: Or, as Wittgenstein himself puts it, “any interpretation still hangs in the air along with what it interprets, and cannot give it any support.

The Psychology of Folk Psychology. Kripke’s boyhood genius did not flicker out in the s, when he studied at Harvard, Oxford, Princeton and Rockefeller University or, more accurately, when he privat independently at these institutions and had occasional contact with his surroundings.

Naming one’s sensation requires a place for the new word: Both of these alternatives are quite unsatisfying; the latter because we want to say that the objects of our understandings are independent from us in some way: But the question is, on what basis does this ability rest?

Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language

In the latter book there are passages that seem to support an anti-philosophical position and others that seem to offer interesting new philosophical views in the process of criticizing more traditional philosophical doctrines such as foundationalism and Cartesianism.

In this latter view, endorsed by Wittgenstein in Wright’s readings, there are no facts about numerical addition that man has so far not discovered, so when privzte come upon such situations, we can flesh out our interpretations further.


Similar skeptical reasoning can be applied to any word of any human language. The chief apparent counter-examples, then, to Wittgenstein’s approach to rule-following lie in two fields: There seem to be at privwte two reasons why this interpretation should have become established.

The following list is highly selective, and entries are included by meeting at least one of the following criteria: In particular, we are not to think of such a human being’s keeping a real diary, but of something like the Cartesian internal equivalent.

Croom – – Dialogue 52 3: Even among those who accept that there is a reasonably self-contained and straightforward private language argument to be discussed, there has been fundamental and widespread disagreement over its details, its significance and even its intended ane, let alone over its soundness.

Originally published as Ludwig Wittgenstein: In these eases the persistent intuition that private mental activities actually constitute rule-following seems very attractive.

Private Language

For its account of Heidegger and scholasticism and for its priavte of previous studies on the topic this book is of great value. He continues to talk of sensations, and of pain as an example, but one should remember that these are not our sensations, the everyday facts of human existence, but the supposed exemplars of philosophical accounts of the everyday facts.

The attempt to name a sensation in a conceptual vacuum merely raises the questions of what this business is supposed to consist in, and what is its point.