Talk:On Certainty

Philosophy: Literature / Analytic / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Analytic philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Needs rewrite

This article needs to be rewritten. Besides grammatical errors and dead links, the article is little more than a regurgitation of a sparknotes summary. A new version should adopt a more scholarly stance, and make clear that there is hardly a universal reading of On Certainty right now, for it has been subject to many diverse interpretations. For example see the collection of essays entitled "Readings of Wittgenstein's On Certainty", edited by Daniele Moral-Sharrock and William H Brenner. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brogersoc (talk • contribs) 2006-05-15T18:49:47 (UTC)

Wittgenstein not "anti-foundationalist"

Calling Wittgenstein an "anti-foundationalist" is blatantly wrong. In the book, Wittgenstein holds that all doubting must come to an end: every epistemic language game has its own bedrock of propositions (although one that may shift in composition -- thus one may label his position "relative foundationalism" (see Addis 2006)) that serves as the method of testing for all other (contingent) propositions. It is the contingent propositions that we can "know", whereas under most circumstances it would be illegitimate use of language to say so of the necessary propositions that serve as the framework of our epistemic language game: for "knowing" implies being able to give evidence for or to doubt the proposition in question. One can gather this much already from the introduction by G.H. von Wright.

It is a tragedy that a unique and important piece of work by one of the greatest philosophers of the 20th century does not yet have a decent wikipedia entry. --A.S. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.17.205.38 (talk) 2006-11-23T23:51:30‎

This Article

As the posts above state, this article is wrong in many respects and needs a major rewrite. If I have the time, soon I will undertake this task. Enigma00 (talk) 05:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

Yes, but nobody should underestimate the challenge of saying much about this work without contravening Wikipedia's 'Pillars'. Meeting that challenge will require impeccable referencing, so I will record some sources right here. For a start, I am working from the Harper Torchbook edition, the preface to which states clearly enough the first difficulty: "It is all first-draft material, which he did not live to excerpt and polish."^[1] Avrum Stroll goes further: "Wittgenstein, as all exegetes know, is a notoriously obscure writer, and On Certainty is especially difficult to understand." ^[2] (Ironically, when drafting the short foreword to the Philosophical Remarks, Wittgenstein had written: "Clarity, perspicuity are valuable in themselves. I am not interested in constructing a building, so much as in having a perspicuous view of the foundations of possible buildings. So, I am not aiming at the same target as the scientists and my way of thinking is different from theirs."^[3] But in what became Culture and Value he had advised "Anything your reader can do for himself, leave to him" (p.77) ^[4]. Arguably, On Certainty leaves it all to do.)

Italian philosopher Annalisa Coliva is convinced of On Certainty's importance: "This ‘text’ is, arguably, Wittgenstein’s third and last masterpiece. It has been defined as a ‘gem in the rough’. That it is a philosophical gem is clear at first encounter, for it contains a wealth of extraordinarily rich observations on G. E. Moore, idealism and scepticism, the nature of knowledge, belief, doubt, certainty and the role of reasons or justifications with respect to them. Yet it is clear, upon second encounter with it, that it is also ‘in the rough’ because different threads emerge, often in tension with one another."^[5]

As well as the dozen or so perspectives in Moyal-Sharrock/Brenner^[6] (grouped into 'Framework', 'Transcendental', 'Epistemic' and 'Therapeutic' readings^[a]), A C Grayling contributes an essay on OC to Hanjo Glock's Wittgenstein: A Critical Reader^[7]. There are also book-length treatments by Daniele Moyal-Sharrock^[8] and, more recently, Andy Hamilton^[9].

Finally, about the man himself, Norman Malcolm's 'A Memoir' reprints 57 letters from LW and includes a 18-page biographical sketch by G. H. von Wright that describes "an incomparable, but demanding, friend. I believe that most of those who loved him and had his friendship also feared him. [..] Wittgenstein's most characteristic features were his great and pure seriousness and powerful intelligence. I have never met a man who impressed me so strongly in either respect."^[10]

-Soap 92.29.23.91 (talk) 14:45, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

^ "the ‘Framework reading’ gathers chapters that either expound or critically examine foundational and grammatical views of On Certainty; the ‘Transcendental reading’ offers neo-Kantian and neo-Realist interpretations of the work; the ‘Epistemic reading’ examines the epistemic versus nonepistemic nature of the certainty in question; finally, the ‘Therapeutic reading’ approaches On Certainty in the spirit of ‘New Wittgenstein’ commentators, nudging us away from framework and transcendental readings, and towards a less theoretical, more dialectical and open-textured interpretation of Wittgenstein’s aims." (M-S & B p.3) So that's clear enough at least.

References

^ Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1969). On Certainty. New York: Harper and Row. p. vie. ISBN 0-06-131686-5.
^ Stroll, Avrum (1994). Moore and Wittgenstein on certainty. Oxford UK: Oxford Uni Press. ISBN 0-19-508488-8.
^ Monk, Ray (2005). How To Read Wittgenstein. London: Granta Books. pp. 95–96. ISBN 978-1-86207724-9.
^ Stern, David G. (1995). Wittgenstein on mind and language. New York: Oxford Univ Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-19-511147-8.
^ Coliva, Annalisa (2010). Moore and Wittgenstein: Scepticism, Certainty and Common Sense. Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-230-58063-3.
^ Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele and William H Brenner (eds) (2005). Readings of Wittgenstein's On Certainty. Basingstoke, Hants UK: Palgrave Macmillan. p. vii. ISBN 1-4039-4449-0. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)
^ Glock, Hans-Johann (2001). Wittgenstein: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. pp. 305–321. ISBN 0-631-19437-1.
^ Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele (2004). Understanding Wittgenstein's On Certainty. Basingstoke, Hants UK: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-53553-4.
^ Hamilton, Andy (2014). Wittgenstein and On Certainty (Routledge philosophy guidebook to). Abingdon, Oxon UK: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-45076-8.
^ Malcolm, Norman (1984). Ludwig Wittgenstein A Memoir (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford Univ Press. p. 17. ISBN 0-19-924759-5.

On Certainty is fifty

Happy 50th birthday, OC. I wrote you a present. It's a C program that reads your widely circulated e-text and extracts about a fifth of you: my selection of your most penetrating insights, chosen to create a representative summary version because, sadly, your author didn't live long enough to "excerpt and polish" you. I hope you like it. And happy new year. -Soap 92.11.153.12 (talk) 18:49, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

/*** * Compliance: ISO9899:1990 (aka ANSI C) ***/ #include <stdlib.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <ctype.h> #include <string.h> #undef NDEBUG #include <assert.h> #define ensure assert #define U(S) ((unsigned char *)(S)) static unsigned char A[678][4]; /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ static int dirtyjob(FILE *fi, const char *fn) { char a_[0x666], *s; int l= 0, x= 0, z, p= 0, d= 0, oc= 0, oc_= 0; long Z= 0, Y= 0; const unsigned char *a; while ((s= fgets(a_, sizeof a_, fi)) != 0) { ++l; *strpbrk(s, "\r\n")= 0; if ((z= strlen(s)) <= x); else x= z; while (*s == ' ') ++s; if (!*s); else { if (!isdigit(*U(s))) ++p; else if (!strchr(s, ' ')) { ++d; continue; } else { z= 0; sscanf(s, "%u. %n", &oc, &z); ensure(z); s+= z; ensure(*s); a= A[oc_]; ++oc_; ensure(oc==oc_); if (*a==a[3] && *a==a[2] && *a==a[1] || oc<2); else if (a[p] && (p==3 || !a[p+1])); else { assert(!"NOPE"); } p= 0; } if (!oc); else { int c= A[oc][p], d; char *t= s; Z+= z= strlen(s); if (!c || (p || printf("\n%d. ", oc), c == '-')); else if (c == '+' || c == '^') { puts(s); Y+= z; } else { const char *a[101], **p= a, **q; int o= 64; (void)o; *p= t; while ((t= strchr(t+1, ' ')) != 0) if (!ispunct(d= *U(t-1)) || strchr(",=", d)); else { *t= 0; *++p= t+1; } if (**p) ++p; *p= 0; if (isupper(c)) { p= a-1; q= a+(c-'A'); } else if (islower(c)) { o= 97+26-(p-a); (void)o; q= p-1; p-= 'z'-c+2; } else { assert(!"NOPE"); } for (--Y; ++p <= q; ) { printf("%s%c", *p, p!=q? ' ': '\n'); Y+= strlen(*p)+1; } } } } } fprintf(stderr, "\n%s: #%d, max=%d, d= %d, oc= %d, Z= %ld, Y= %ld(%.2f%%)", fn, l, x, d, oc, Z, Y, 100.0*Y/Z + 0.5); /**/ return 1; } /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ static int dothejob(FILE *fi, const char *fn) { char a[666]; char *s, *t; int l= 0, from, to= 0, next; while ((s= fgets(a, sizeof a, fi)) != 0) { int c= *U(s), n; ++l; *(t= strpbrk(s, "\r\n"))= 0; *++t= 0; if (!isdigit(c)); else { int it, was= 0, m; next= to+1; if (n= 0, sscanf(s, "%u-%u%n", &from, &to, &n), strchr(" ", c= *U(t= s+n))); else { fprintf(stderr, "%s(%d): \"%.50s\"\n", fn, l, s); assert(!"Bad TABLE: expected range"); } ensure(from <= to); ensure(from == next); while (++t, c) { char *u= t, *v; int d, w; if (m= n= 0, sscanf(t, "%u%n%*s%n", &it, &m, &n), strchr(" ", c= *U(t+= n? n: (n= m)))) if (d= *U(u+m), c && !isspace(d) && ((u= strchr(u+m, '(')) != 0) && u<t) if ((u= strchr(t, ')')) != 0) if (n-= t-(u+1), strchr(" ", c= *U(t= u+1))); else { assert(!"NOPE"); /**/ } else; else if (isspace(d)) { c= *U(t-= n-m); n= m; } else; else { assert(!"NOPE"); /**/ } { assert(c==*U(t)); *t= 0; /* c has old *t */ u= t-(n-m); d= strlen(u); if (d<=1 && strchr("*!?", *U(u))) d= 0; else fprintf(stderr, "`%5.*s'%03d", n-m, t-(n-m), it); ensure(d <= 5); } if (*u=='?'); else if (!(*u && !strpbrk(u, "!*"))) *A[it]= A[it][1]= A[it][2]= A[it][3]= '+'; else { for (v= u-1; (w= *U(++v)) != 0; A[it][v-u]= w) if (v[1]!='?'); else { w= '-'; ++v; ++u; } { int i= v-u-1; while (A[it][i] == '-' && i--); if (i>=0); else *A[it]= A[it][1]= A[it][2]= A[it][3]= 0; } } if (!d); else fprintf(stderr, "[%-4.4s]", A[it]); if (was < it) was= it; else { fprintf(stderr, "%s: %03d-%03d %03d %03d \"%.30s\"\n", fn, from, to, it, was, s); assert(!"Bad TABLE: range"); } } } } return 1; } /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ /*\ \*/ extern int main(int c, const char *const *v) { const char *s; FILE *f; if (c); else; if ((f= fopen(__FILE__, "rb")) != 0) { (void)dothejob(f, __FILE__); } else perror(s? s: "stdin(?!?)"); while ((s= *++v) != 0) { if (*s != '-'); else if (*++s); else s= 0; if ((f= s? fopen(s, "rb"): stdin) != 0) { (void)dirtyjob(f, s? s: "-"); if (s) fclose(f); } else perror(s? s: "stdin(?!?)"); } return EXIT_SUCCESS; } #if 1 #else 001-006 2? 3 4* 6 007-010 8E 10Q? 011-019 11 12? 18? 19! 020-030 24! 28 29 30-+ 031-037 31 33 35? 038-042 38z 043-047 45 46 47z 048-056 54++? 56 057-060 58 59? 061-065 61 62 63 64 65 /***/ 066-076 71? 72? 74 077-088 79 80 82 88 089-093 91? 92-+ 094-099 94 95 100-105 102z 103 105 106-110 110 111-123 114 115 117* 124-127 124? 128-132 128 129 130? 131! 133-135 135 136-144 136 137y 139 140 141 142 143? 144 145-150 145 146 147 148 149 150 151-158 152 155C? 156 159-164 160 161 162* 165-173 166 168? 169? 172? 174-177 174 178-181 178?? 179? 182-192 182? 185?? 189? 191 /***/ 193-200 194 196 199 200? 201-204 204 205-207 205 206 208-216 209 211* 213 215 217-228 217? 220 225* 229-235 229* 232 235? 236-244 237 243? 245-254 248 249? 253 255-262 255^? 256 260 262z+ 263-274 270 271 275-281 275--^? 276 279* 282-286 283 286? 287-299 287 292? 294? 295 296 /***/ 300-309 305 308z 310-317 313y 317 318-321 320? 322-330 324 329 331-336 331 336 337-346 341* 347-353 348 354-359 354? 359* 360-368 360 369-375 375* 376-388 378 383? 388z 389-399 392? 397z 400-409 404 409* 410-416 410 415* 417-425 418 422* 426-430 427 431-434 432* 435-446 446-w 447-454 447* 454 455-463 458 461z /**/ 464-470 464? 466 469 470 471-477 471 474 475 476+- 477 478-485 478 482 486-497 486? 492* 496 498-511 501 505 511 512-519 513* 519-z+ 520-525 521 /* 524-525 to next? */ 526-544 532* 538 545-549 548 550-554 550? 551 555-560 555* 558-y+ 559 560 561-566 562 563w--- 567-579 575?* 576? 580-586 581 587-593 593 594-600 595 599* 601-612 601 606? 608 613-620 615?* 616 617? 618 Es(x4: 255? 275?) CL(x2: 558) DL 446BL3 54(2) 476(2) 519(3) 621-627 625w++ 627 628-637 628^? 629? 630 637?? 638-646 640* 641a? 647-658 647 651 654a? 655 657A 659-669 659---z? 668* 670-676 670? 673 674 #endif

[7] "the ‘Framework reading’ gathers chapters that either expound or critically examine foundational and grammatical views of On Certainty; the ‘Transcendental reading’ offers neo-Kantian and neo-Realist interpretations of the work; the ‘Epistemic reading’ examines the epistemic versus nonepistemic nature of the certainty in question; finally, the ‘Therapeutic reading’ approaches On Certainty in the spirit of ‘New Wittgenstein’ commentators, nudging us away from framework and transcendental readings, and towards a less theoretical, more dialectical and open-textured interpretation of Wittgenstein’s aims." (M-S & B p.3) So that's clear enough at least.

[1] Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1969). On Certainty. New York: Harper and Row. p. vie. ISBN 0-06-131686-5.

[2] Stroll, Avrum (1994). Moore and Wittgenstein on certainty. Oxford UK: Oxford Uni Press. ISBN 0-19-508488-8.

[3] Monk, Ray (2005). How To Read Wittgenstein. London: Granta Books. pp. 95–96. ISBN 978-1-86207724-9.

[4] Stern, David G. (1995). Wittgenstein on mind and language. New York: Oxford Univ Press. p. 7. ISBN 0-19-511147-8.

[5] Coliva, Annalisa (2010). Moore and Wittgenstein: Scepticism, Certainty and Common Sense. Basingstoke, Hants: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-230-58063-3.

[6] Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele and William H Brenner (eds) (2005). Readings of Wittgenstein's On Certainty. Basingstoke, Hants UK: Palgrave Macmillan. p. vii. ISBN 1-4039-4449-0. {{cite book}}: |first= has generic name (help)

[8] Glock, Hans-Johann (2001). Wittgenstein: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. pp. 305–321. ISBN 0-631-19437-1.

[9] Moyal-Sharrock, Daniele (2004). Understanding Wittgenstein's On Certainty. Basingstoke, Hants UK: Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-230-53553-4.

[10] Hamilton, Andy (2014). Wittgenstein and On Certainty (Routledge philosophy guidebook to). Abingdon, Oxon UK: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-45076-8.

[11] Malcolm, Norman (1984). Ludwig Wittgenstein A Memoir (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford Univ Press. p. 17. ISBN 0-19-924759-5.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[a]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]