Im reading Tractatus and holy shit he's actually right about everything, he managed to solve philosophy without even making it seem like that much of a task.
>>25506008I remember the first time I read Wittgenstein too. You'll learn better, give it time.
>>25506008>and then, get this, he solves it again
More like POOdwig SHITTgenstein
He was so right, there was no utility to what he said. The most based people need be ignored for humans to continue their delusions. And I'm fine with that. I mean, even if nihilism and anti natalism might be true, no ones ever gonna actually believe any of this, there's no "use". He did back track a bit later on but I still feel like it was mostly cope since he never even published what he wrote. And the cope is essentially him back tracking into what makes us human which is fine, I like the blue and brown book, but the tractatus is still the best thing he wrote. The terse coldness of it will always be very compelling despite all that.
>>25506008Wittgestein was a literal, honest to god autist who tried to "solve" problems nobody except him had. His whole work is a massive cope by one extremely autistic dude who is trying convince himself that he's uncovering the secrets of the universe, while in reality he just has a brain disorder that prevents him from understanding basic things.
>>25506290Elaborate on specifics, or your opinion is bullshit
Guys, no one tell him what happened to Wittgenstein post 1930s P S: No he was not a nazi
>>25506240>>25506290yea i feel like picture theory just limits language to literal representation. its no wonder he later rejected the theory cause it establishes fucking stupid literalist criteria for what can be said. and of course it has no concept of the actual act of saying which changes the sayer (emotional discharge, creation etc) and reads like sentences are just inscribed on a wall somewhere and the sole thing to do is judge the resemblance to the natural world. sure descartes was wrong and philosophers relied on language in erroneous ways but to dismiss it all obviously misses the point. think of all the great neural pathways to trigger by uttering Nonsense
>>25506008I agree with everyone in this thread but at the same time I just love to read him sperging out over something I would probably never think of in his way, he is fun to read.
>>25506290Isn't that just basic philosophy? Trying to solve 'problems' that don't exist. Take 'the problem of evil' or 'free will'. These are not problems or questions anyone can solve because each culture has a different approach. It's endless circle jerking by western autists to delude themselves into thinking their hard won careers were meaningful. At some point in history philosophy stopped making sense and got overshadowed by science. I think that was the purpose all along, to make enough sense that science explodes, beyond that, philosophy is meaningless schizobabble. AI might unironically benefit from it more than humans ever could.
>>25506305I don't see how this makes any sense. How does picture theory establish criteria for what can be said? Isn't that circular reasoning? You are alluding that there exists things that can't be said, how can you even know that? Just because something can't be said in english, doesn't mean it can't be said in japanese. What can be said is representation, whatever we know is a representation of what we've seen. I've never really understood why philosophers take the contrary seriously.
>>25506326yes but theres a ton of autists to pick from and you get to see their life work condensed into like 500 pages which may offer you new ways of approaching and conceiving the world
>>25506290>massive cope by one extremely autistic dude who is trying convince himself that he's uncovering the secrets of the universbut thats just le philosophy dude XD
>>25506332no im alluding that what can be said is not necessarily existent, at least as wittgenstein then saw it, and that its obviously not a complete theory of language. its useful if your only speech activity is truth statements. and this is clear from the fact that he has to undo 'the ladder' at the end. its not some big irony that he has to, its that his older system cant comprehend its own expression in text as anything other than nonsense. aint that circular, just as you say?where do you think new stuff originates if reproduction is all there is? could it be that language is a versatile tool with no predestined function and that humans using it is a masturbatory activity of devising new ways to rub? truth rubs you one way and literature, rhetoric, philosophy etc the other
>>25506368There's no new stuff in the sense that you are going for, there's only what is yet to be recognized. Saying that it's not necessarily existent is also being myopic, what can be said contains something that exists even if the whole is not yet existing. Isn't that how we get from worshiping things like animal-man hybrids to the christian god then get into arguments about whether he exists? These are what he called language games.
The best thing about Wittgenstein is how he is concise. He gets his point across in sentences and paragraphs, he doesn't need 750 pages of nonsense. Reading Chesterson's Everlasting Man was like pulling teeth at times because he just kept repeating the same shit over and over.
