I won't here enumerate the book's content;

brief summaries of its main points are everywhere. What makes it so excellent is in the smaller details here and there, and their implications going forwards. I read and reviewed this some time ago, but having sat on it for a while, and read some other books tangent to it, I felt compelled to come back and rewrite this.

Many people like to say that the book is poorly structured, dense and elusive. Maybe, but all to a purpose. Wittgenstein understood the role that structure at a larger level could play in communication, so he treated the flow of the book very deliberately. His subject here is not agreeable to a strict format, and his goal is not to pontificate.

This book blossoms out into many different areas. Saul Kripke was inspired, or "struck" as he phrased it, to write On Rules and Private Language by PI, and Paul Feyerabend's Against Method bears its distinctive traces, intellectually and stylistically. These works pull very different directions, but they both are stained heavily by Wittgenstein. PI has borne fruit across a sweeping expanse of thought. For me, it has been a fermentative experience, and the variety of interesting bits on the mind, rule following, culture, language, and meaning still re-emerge in different contexts as I go here and there. Whether you treat him as a skeptic or as proposing an original philosophical method (and some tidbits), a dedicated reading of this book is incredibly stimulating and rewarding, if you are willing to try to digest and apply these ideas beyond the reading itself. It challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to think deeply about the nature of language, thought, and reality. The book is not an easy read, but the effort invested in understanding it is well worth it. It can open up new perspectives and help us to see the world in a different light.

I will always think of you.

This simple sentence holds a world of meaning. It implies a deep and abiding connection, a sense of someone who is constantly on one's mind. Whether it's a loved one, a friend, or a mentor, the thought of that person lingers, bringing comfort, inspiration, or perhaps a hint of longing.

It could be that you think of them when you face a difficult decision, imagining what they would say or do. Or maybe it's in the quiet moments of the day, when a memory of them surfaces and brings a smile to your face. No matter the circumstances, the fact that you will always think of them shows the significance they hold in your life.

So, cherish those thoughts and let them serve as a reminder of the special people who have touched your heart and made a difference in your life.

Wittgenstein, who had already set a gold standard in the Tractatus, goes beyond all expectations in Philosophical Investigations. However, this work amounts to producing what is considered the second worst poem ever written. The first worst was the original manuscript of the same, which, I have been informed, had two additional aphorisms.

If only we were so lucky that Wittgenstein was not real but just a figment of Douglas Adams' imagination. In that case, he would have been the hero of the Vogon art scene.

This book is simply crap. It is not true philosophy. It is what occurs when a German engineer reads just fifteen pages of Theatetus and suddenly fancies himself a philosopher.

It seems that Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations has failed to meet the high standards that were set by his earlier work. The comparison to a bad poem and the criticism of its authenticity as philosophy suggest that the author has a very low opinion of this particular piece of writing.

Perhaps further examination and analysis are needed to truly understand the value and significance of Wittgenstein's work. But based on this assessment, it is clear that the author believes it falls far short of what it could and should have been.

For the record,

3 stars reflects only my subjective enjoyment level,

not the quality of the book itself.

I believe my rating would be much higher if I'd had an upper-level university course to explain it all.

You see, when I read this book, I was simply going by my own gut feeling and personal experience.

I didn't have the in-depth knowledge and understanding that a university course might provide.

Perhaps with that additional learning, I would be able to appreciate the finer details and subtleties of the book.

I might see the connections and themes that I currently overlook.

So, while my 3-star rating is based on my immediate reaction,

I'm aware that it doesn't do full justice to the potential of the book.

I look forward to the day when I can expand my knowledge and reevaluate this book with a more informed perspective.

One of the most dangerous philosophy books that I have read.

When the mind of a mathematics world thinks in a philosophical language..

The translation is excellent..

The third book of Wittgenstein.. The most important book.

Wittgenstein's works are often profound and challenging. His ideas have had a significant impact on the development of philosophy.

The third book, in particular, may contain some of his most crucial and revolutionary thoughts.

Reading such a book requires careful attention and deep thinking.

It can expand our intellectual horizons and make us think about fundamental questions in a new way.

However, it can also be dangerous in the sense that it may challenge our existing beliefs and ways of thinking.

We need to approach it with an open mind and a critical attitude to truly understand and benefit from it.

Overall, Wittgenstein's third book is a must-read for anyone interested in philosophy and the nature of thought.

Language is not simply a picture theory of meaning. Instead, it should be regarded as a powerful tool. By closely examining language, we can gain valuable insights that assist us in grappling with philosophical problems. When we turn our attention to philosophical issues, it becomes evident that many of them are, in fact, mere confusions of language.

We must recognize that the traditional approach of trying to solve philosophical problems in the conventional sense may not be the most effective. Instead, we should focus on dissolving these problems. This means understanding the root causes of the language-based confusions and working to clarify and untangle them.

By doing so, we can gain a more accurate and profound understanding of the nature of these philosophical conundrums. We can see beyond the surface-level misunderstandings and arrive at a more comprehensive and enlightened perspective. In this way, the examination of language becomes a crucial step in the process of dealing with philosophical problems.

Wittgenstein presented a novel experience to me when I chanced upon this book during my graduate studies.

He endeavors to delve into the very depths of human knowledge, reducing concepts to their most fundamental forms. By methodically dissecting a question and striving to break down every assumption to its unassailable foundation, he is perhaps engaged in something analogous to what physicists do as they seek to uncover the ultimate subatomic particles of matter.

I have not perused his earlier work, but I understand it was an attempt to establish more logical thought than what our "fuzzy" language permits. For instance, how can we speak of "a beautiful house" and "a beautiful day"? What is the common denominator of "beautiful"? One can surely concur that this ambiguity appears haphazard. And yet, somehow, we generally manage to get by with it and are unlikely to adopt an alternative. (My summary doubtless falls far short of the mark.)

This later work seeks a more natural solution, studying language not as it perhaps should be but as it is actually used. He observes, for example, that the word "game" has numerous uses that are only slightly related to one another. It could refer to a chess game or a children's playground game, or it could even function as a verb. Making sense of the word then hinges on understanding the context in which it is employed and the underlying concept or paradigm upon which the usage is based.

The word itself is merely an arbitrary sign. As noted above, we function reasonably well using the signs we know and share, but how do we achieve this? How is a concept held in one person's mind reliably communicated to another? Also, how does the recipient determine whether the message is intended seriously? The process involves elements such as word choice and grammar, but it occurs too swiftly to observe or even contemplate. As for the person speaking or writing, how is personal experience and perspective filtered and interpreted in such a way as to attach meaningful signs to it?

The answer to these questions lies in an indeterminate number of rules. "One has already to know something in order to be capable of asking a thing's name" (i.e., is it a noun, verb, …). But sometimes we extrapolate from a previous use of a noun and convert it into a verb. Or an adjective acquires new definitions (so that "green," for example, can signify inexperienced). There is no absolute rulebook that spells out everything that can be done with words. So what is the nature of something if the boundaries are not fixed?

Given a figure of nine squares—three red, three green, two white, and one black—how do we describe it? Are there four component elements or nine? Well, both answers are correct; neither contradicts the other. I gather that Wittgenstein remained uneasy with this situation. On the other hand, it is the key to creative language use and the never-ending process of defining our experience.

I didn't understand half of the things in this book, and the half that I understood, I understood only half as well as I should have.

One day, I had a fight and I was anguished and sad. I went out to clear my mind and sat down to read. The first thing I read said, "Look at the blue of the sky and say to yourself, 'How blue the sky is!'" And when I looked up, I didn't find a single cloud, only blue. It was a magical moment.

This experience made me realize that sometimes, even when we don't fully understand something, it can still have a profound impact on us. The simple words in the book led me to look up and see the beauty of the sky, which in turn helped to ease my troubled heart. It was as if the universe was sending me a message of hope and peace.

From that day on, I have tried to approach books and life with a more open and curious mind, knowing that there are always hidden treasures waiting to be discovered.

‘It is not impossible that it should fall to the lot of this work, in its poverty and in the darkness of this time, to bring light into one brain or another—but, of course, it is not likely’ - PI, Preface.

Such a novel work that it’s hard to imagine anyone capable of doing a proper distillation. For my own sake, I want to lay out what I think is the essential change I see from the early to late Wittgenstein. One interesting point of debate I’m curious to look into after reading is where people stand on if there is a positive project here, and what it actually is (Ludwig seems to be asking far more questions than he answers.) No doubt, to my mind, there is a strong proscription that cuts throughout as he wanders about. My hunch is this:

In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein believed that language is functional (i.e. has ‘sense’) when it properly corresponds (see also, ‘shows,’ ‘represents,’ etc.) reality. The ‘world’ is states of affairs, and his proscription there is for language to propositionally correspond to such states of affairs:

‘4.023 A proposition constructs a world with the help of a logical scaffolding, so that one can actually see from the proposition how everything stands logically if it is true.’

‘4.06 A proposition can be true or false only in virtue of being a picture of reality.’


Now, compare these (and others) to these PI quotes:

‘What engages with the concept of truth is a proposition….’ (Sounds like the quotes above, right? See the next line)

‘But this is a bad picture. It is as if one were to say “the chess king is *the* piece that one puts in check.” But this can mean no more than that in our game of chess only the king is put in check. Just as the proposition that only a *proposition* can be true can say no more than that we predicate “true” and “false” only of what we call a proposition. And what a proposition is, is in *one* sense determined by the rules of sentence formation, and in another sense by the use of the sign in the language game.’ (§ 136)

Wittgenstein directly rejects his early thought. Propositions are dynamic and determined by its particular instantiation in a communal understanding of the use of signs.

See also:

‘“Will that description do or not?” The answer is: “Yes, it will, but only for this narrowly circumscribed area.” (§ 3)

We are no longer thinking in terms of the ‘world’ or ‘totality of facts.’ Instead, it is rules, practices…in other words, little ’t’ totalities. Language (thought, meaning, signs, etc.) is always already a shared structure with a variety of features by which we arrive at actual communication/meaning/synthesis, and all of which are conditioned by the language-game one is a participant of.

This is only one small part of the project of the PI. This doesn’t even get into family-resemblance, his critique of meanings correspondence to thought (and private thoughts writ large.) One surprising dynamic of this book (the whole second section is dedicated to it!) is the critique of psychology (if I start typing my reaction to this I won’t leave my house for a day.)

Why this shift seems to be the central to me is that the rest seems to fall into place in his ontological framework. All I can say is that I’m truly grateful to have had the experience of reading through a singular thinker with my homie Elliot, and I am convinced that these are some of the richest texts in the history of philosophy. I’ll no doubt be returning to these for many years to come.

This is a truly challenging book to assess.

At certain moments, I had the distinct impression that Wiggentstein was like the solitary beacon of clarity shining through a dense haze of philosophical confusion. However, at other times, I simply couldn't suppress the thought that the \\n  Philosophical Tribulations\\n of a particular "Louis Witteringswine" seemed to be an almost too perfect parody.

Taking everything into account, I discovered that the initial 100 or so paragraphs were the most enlightening (and not coincidentally, they form what is likely the most approachable part of the text). In other areas, Wittgenstein's seemingly incapacity to express specific theses led to numerous "Wait, what on earth am I reading?" moments.

But, of course, this perception might very well alter upon my second arduous journey through this text—because I truly feel the need to read it one more time.

Perhaps with a fresh perspective and a deeper understanding, I will be able to better appreciate the nuances and subtleties that I might have overlooked during my first reading.

Only time will tell if my opinion of this book will change for the better or worse.

Please provide the article that needs to be rewritten and expanded so that I can help you.

I initially read this book as a component of a college survey course. Years later, I picked it up and reread it, and then reread it once more. Amusingly perhaps, I adopted Wittgenstein's "Tell me how you are searching, and I will tell you what you are searching for." as the basis for determining search engine results (years ago. I think it was in the early 2000s) with "Tell me how you are searching, and I will tell you what you will find."

The material is applicable to numerous investigations in many disciplines. Philosophical Investigations was, to me, not just a book about philosophy. It was rather a blueprint for concise thinking processes and systems. It provided valuable insights and guidelines that could be utilized in various fields of study. The ideas presented in the book could help individuals approach problems and inquiries in a more organized and efficient manner. It emphasized the importance of understanding the nature of our searches and how they influence the outcomes we obtain. By carefully examining our methods of searching, we can gain a better understanding of what we are likely to discover.

Overall, Philosophical Investigations had a profound impact on my thinking and continues to be a source of inspiration and guidance in my intellectual pursuits.