In this biography, the author vividly portrays Wittgenstein's longing for a future world-culture.

He envisions a place where art, music, poetry, and religion are held in the same high regard and treated with the same gravity as science is in our current world.

Wittgenstein felt like a stranger, stranded in his own world. He reflected that without ties to either man or God, one is inevitably marked as an alien, completely alienated.

Personally, I find myself pondering who among us resembles Wittgenstein more. At first, I thought of Jeremy. Like Bertrand Russell's assessment of the new German student at Cambridge aiming for a B.A. degree, Jeremy couldn't bear to publish anything less than perfect.

Then I considered Ivan, who left school to seek other forms of employment among ordinary people.

Finally, I thought of myself. I can identify with Wittgenstein's desire for an environment free from even the slightest disturbances, so that his work wouldn't suffer.

I also relate to his description of his pen moving rapidly, as if the writing was being drawn out of him. And let's not forget his pacing back and forth in a room, obsessed with purging himself of sins and tormented by the problems of philosophy.

I believe all three of us share some aspects of his character. In a sense, we can all be considered Wittgenstinians now. After all, Ludwig is widely regarded as having revolutionized the aesthetic approach of 20th-century philosophy, an approach no doubt derived from Nietzsche and Kierkegaard.

However, if I had never met Jeremy Good, I might not have understood what Ray Monk meant when he wrote about G.E. Moore's wife carefully limiting Wittgenstein's conversations with Moore to an hour and a half. Otherwise, it would be too exhausting and Wittgenstein might be at risk of having another stroke.

Jeremy Good, with his habit of destroying what he had built up earlier in a conversation, reminds me of Wittgenstein's process of continuous revision and rejection in his writing. This sometimes led to such repetitiveness that the work seemed uninteresting to those not initiated.

He has criticized me in the past for not being impressed by philosophical thoughts expressed in plain language, without the academic "dressing-up." My only response was that, being an American, I was too much of a capitalist not to desire an attractive package for my products, and this extended even to my intellectual commodities. Three stars.

I'm afraid I've never been able to extract much substance from either the Tractatus or the Investigations, aside from the occasional extremely quotable line here and there.

However, there is no doubt that their author, Ludwig Wittgenstein, had an incredibly captivating personality. The agony of his profound thought was palpable, and yet there was also an unintentional humor that stemmed from his purity of purpose.

Ray Monk's portrait of Wittgenstein in his biography is masterful and highly entertaining. He delves deep into Wittgenstein's life, exploring his complex relationships, his intellectual pursuits, and the inner turmoil that drove him.

Monk's writing is engaging and accessible, making it possible for even those without a background in philosophy to appreciate the genius of Wittgenstein. Through his work, we gain a better understanding of the man behind the philosophical texts and the impact he had on the field of philosophy.

In conclusion, while I may not fully understand the works of Wittgenstein, I can appreciate the power of his personality and the value of Ray Monk's portrait of him.

One of the most complicated books I've ever read is truly a mind-boggling experience.

It presents a complex web of ideas and concepts that require careful thought and analysis to understand.

The author's writing style is dense and filled with detailed descriptions, making it a challenging read for even the most avid bookworms.

However, despite its complexity, the book offers a wealth of knowledge and insights that are well worth the effort.

Each page seems to hold a new discovery, and as I progress through the book, I find myself constantly reflecting on the ideas presented.

It forces me to think outside the box and consider different perspectives, which has broadened my intellectual horizons.

Overall, this book is a testament to the power of literature to challenge and inspire us, and I would highly recommend it to anyone looking for a thought-provoking read.

Normal human beings have a complex effect on me. They can be a balm, bringing a sense of comfort and connection, but at the same time, they can also be a torment. Drury hoped Wittgenstein would make many friends, but Wittgenstein's response was rather harsh, calling Drury thoughtless and stupid and expressing his inability to imagine having lots of friends.

Exhaustion, loneliness, and madness were Wittgenstein's lot, and he had to accept them. However, he also had to guard against being theatrical. According to Russell, Wittgenstein would pace up and down like a wild beast for hours in agitated silence. Once, when Russell asked him if he was thinking about logic or his sins, Wittgenstein replied 'Both' and continued pacing.

Wittgenstein was ridiculed at school. His schoolmates chanted an alliterative jingle that played on his unhappiness and the distance between him and the rest of the school. In his attempts to make friends, he felt 'betrayed and sold' by his schoolmates.

The great problem that Wittgenstein constantly pondered was whether there is an a priori order in the world and, if so, what it consists of. Unfortunately, he had to go to Vienna, a thought that appalled him. He felt that being where he was did him a great deal of good and that he could no longer bear life among people. From time to time, he was afraid of dying, which he attributed to a false view of life.

While I must admit that this book didn't enhance my perception of Wittgenstein as a philosopher, it did evoke a great deal of empathy for him as a writer. Indeed, the author's rather schizoid approach to romantic relationships, where he was demanding in his ethical standards and extremely hard on himself, and someone whose harsh and extreme statements could be easily misinterpreted, are issues that I can relate to from my own life. Wittgenstein clearly didn't seem to enjoy life much, which made me feel a bit sad as a reader of his works. It was evident from reading this book that the author suffered from an overly vivid imagination, which made his own life less enjoyable. Despite having many advantages that could have been used to improve his life and the world, Wittgenstein didn't really seem to enjoy being alive.

This book, nearly 600 pages long and divided into four parts and 27 chapters, is a substantial work for any reader to grapple with. After an introduction, the author begins by discussing Wittgenstein's youth up to his first 30 years, which includes his family's tendency towards self-destruction, his experiences in Manchester, his time as Russell's protege and then master as his philosophical gifts became evident, his time in Norway in self-imposed isolation, and his experiences during World War I. The author then spends some time discussing Wittgenstein's lost decade between 1919 and 1928, followed by his productive time in Cambridge and Vienna from 1929 to 1941, and finally his waning years from 1941 to 1951.

After reading this book, many people may not feel the need to read any other books about Wittgenstein. His views impoverished the world of philosophy, and the contradictions within his personality and life are too numerous and painful to handle. His life was filled with misery, much of it self-inflicted. One doesn't have to like what he said as a philosopher to feel that his God-given gifts were largely wasted due to his failures to live the right way, failures that many intelligent people also share.

A brilliantly written biography about a man with a brilliant mind.

I had initial concerns that Ray Monk's biography of Wittgenstein might turn out to be a rather dry and laborious read. However, it continuously demonstrated its remarkable ability to engage the reader, while also providing profound insights into Wittgenstein's life and his countless (seriously, did the man ever stop thinking?!) thoughts.

This biography, while centering on the man himself, also manages to be a captivating history of early 20th-century thought and history. It focuses significantly on the so-called British analytical school (which encompasses the philosophy of mathematics and logics), but also covers various aspects such as the first and second world wars, early 20th-century Vienna and the Vienna Circle, and other related topics.

It appears that Wittgenstein was what we would typically refer to in other contexts as a tortured artist. Given that at one point he stated that he believed philosophy should be written more like poetry, perhaps this isn't too far-fetched. To me, Wittgenstein seems like an extremely intelligent individual who simply couldn't escape his own way of thinking. Perhaps it was his early exposure to Otto Weininger's rather crazy theories in "Sex and Character" combined with his own innate nature of righteous questioning, but whatever the cause, it granted Wittgenstein little mental or emotional (or indeed, spiritual) rest for much of his life. One example is his desperate need for companionship and yet his near inability to find anyone he could respect or feel at ease with, combined with his equally desperate need to be alone to accomplish any work. Now, apply this kind of thinking and feeling to almost every aspect of his life or the choices he had to make, and you get a sense of the seemingly constant turmoil he almost always found himself in.

And yet, in the biography, delightful surprises are abundant... Wittgenstein, the architect! Wittgenstein, the medical instrument innovator! Who would have known?!

I wholeheartedly recommend this to anyone even remotely interested in Wittgenstein or early 20th-century intellectual history. And just to reiterate one point I made earlier, Ray Monk's writing is an absolute pleasure.

The author, Monk, is himself a professor of post-analytic philosophy. I find it very interesting that the introduction discusses why the author wrote "The Duty of Genius", specifically about the process from W1 to W2. That is, this biography attempts to refute the idea that Wittgenstein was a dual personality, and there is no such interpretation as W1 vs W2. It can also be read together with the appendix at the end of the second volume.

Is genius innate DNA? Or can genius be nurtured? Who determines whether you are a genius? Interestingly, Wittgenstein was considered dull in his family. He not only did not have early musical talent, but also had no other talents. He even did not speak until the age of four. He was completely different from his rebellious older brothers and had no suicidal tendencies. Before the age of fourteen, he was an ordinary person (in the context of his family). Even more so, who said he was a genius? It was not until after he met Russell that he was increasingly regarded as such, and that was already after the age of twenty.

However, the whole family had a common characteristic: they insisted on being themselves!

How insistent were they? In the second volume, during the period when Hitler entered Austria, his two sisters were so任性 that they could negotiate with the German army, using their assets to exchange for the condition of not having to leave Germany, that is, to obtain (a certificate of not being a pure Jew). Of course, we can say that having money makes things easier, but this is not something that can be achieved with just money. And his brother, who had already lost his right hand in the war, still continued to play the piano in New York. Almost every brother and sister had similar traces of insistence that could be found in the two volumes. Of course, their parents were no less so!

The economist Hayek (Friedrich Hayek) was Wittgenstein's cousin. The whole family was very outstanding, not just the siblings. And Hayek was the initial reader of Wittgenstein's first well-known work, "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus". What makes me curious is that Hayek also wrote a book about Wittgenstein. It seems that many people have written about this Wittgenstein.

The only person who seems to have met him but is not recorded by either side is Woolf. Neither Wittgenstein nor Woolf has any records. So why did the author, Monk, write this paragraph? It is also very interesting. It can be seen that Monk read a lot of different people's letters and compared all the gatherings of people who almost met at that time. It is very rare and precious.

I didn't like Keynes very much before. But after reading "The Duty of Genius", I saw a different side of him. In any chapter, Keynes' role was to save people! (Well, Wittgenstein needed an education, suddenly needed a scholarship, and oh, he needed a British passport.) He can be regarded as Wittgenstein's Guanyin. The funniest thing is that Keynes thought Wittgenstein was okay. (Cambridge Apostles)

In terms of the education system, I also suddenly appreciate Russell. He cherished talent! Maybe there are many geniuses around us, but whether we can see them with discerning eyes is a question mark? The teacher was able to see Wittgenstein's potential when he didn't even have a university degree and admit that he was more powerful than the teachers. This is not an ordinary teacher.

Wittgenstein, in any period, advocated that his students should not engage in philosophy full-time. It is better to do ordinary people's work, and labor-intensive work is even better. So his favorite students tried their best not to do philosophical work (super funny!). Anscombe, a woman, was one of the few women among Wittgenstein's chat partners and students. (This is already in the second volume.) Wittgenstein did not treat her as a woman. In fact, at that time, Anscombe did not worship Wittgenstein but liked Kafka. So Wittgenstein would say in class: Thank God, we got rid of the woman! (Anscombe was present.) She also lent Kafka's novels to Wittgenstein. And then Wittgenstein would recommend Weininger to her (so funny, Weininger is what later generations call a misogynist). She was also one of the three people whom Wittgenstein designated to review the manuscript after his death.

Understanding humor is like understanding music, and both are used by Wittgenstein as analogies for understanding philosophy. I like the details in the chapter on discussing facial expressions. There is more non-philosophical treatment and the dissemination of love.

He was fascinated by "Detective Story Magazine" (American), as well as Westerns. However, for another magazine with almost the same author called "Black Mask", he could not accept it and would go crazy. (The hard-boiled detective, in fact, I think it suits Wittgenstein very well.)

Early on, Pinsent once recorded that Wittgenstein deprecated music that was too modern. For example, Schoenberg and Mahler, and he never praised Brahms. He believed that Mozart and Beethoven were the real music. I don't know if his musical taste changed after watching those American Westerns in his later years?

He was familiar with Tolstoy's summary of the Gospels. Later, he would go one by one to confess to the students he had punished and apologize to anyone who might be upset with him. This chapter is also very interesting.

His attitude towards the women he liked and later his boyfriends was very strange. This paragraph is full of various controversies. The second volume is even more wonderful. In 1929, he felt that he had to be naked with the truth. (Super funny) He was苦恼 that he was a beast and did not even consider it a苦恼. (I am in danger of becoming more superficial. May God prevent it from happening!) He invited a girl to Norway in early summer. He had to prepare for future life. As a result, his preparation was: he lived in his own house and at the same time arranged for the girl to live in another house. (What did the two people go to Norway for so far away?) Then he stuffed a copy of 1 Corinthians (discussing the nature and virtue of love) into the girl's suitcase. He went to reflect on himself, and the girl, like Pinsent back then, ran out to play. The girl's reflection on the trip to Norway was: This man cannot be married!

Russell thought his passion was the same as Wittgenstein's. In fact, it was different.

In his later years, he did not live with friends because he had no money. Instead, when he could no longer write, he took the initiative to resign from his teaching position and lived with friends because these people could stimulate him and talk about philosophy with him. So, Malcolm became an important object of his later works and conversations.

One of his remarkable points is that he was quite clear about when he was about to leave. So he actually decided to go and live in a monastery (but did not succeed). His conversation before he was about to die was: All my interests are in this life and what I can write. Although he knew that he did not have much time left, he found that he had never thought about the afterlife! He said to his friend, isn't this interesting? Although he had never thought about the afterlife, he believed that God said: I will judge you by your own mouth. When you see others doing the same thing, your own behavior has made you tremble with disgust.

Overall, it is a good and lovely book to read.

Characteristic of my reports, this is my just-finished-top-of-the-noodle-unedited-stream-of-consciousness-bullshit review. I must say that this biography is truly a textbook example of a good one. It is well-researched, presenting a realistic and unromanticized view of the subject. It is also fairly easy to read, which makes it enjoyable, especially if the person you are reading about is as interesting as Wittgenstein. He was an expert whistler, which is quite a unique trait.

Scholars often debate about how Wittgenstein "owned" Vienna or something like that. However, Monk shows that Wittgenstein actually shunned academic socializing and always desired to live a secluded life of manual labor. In fact, he "owned" Vienna only because people like Carnap and others would not have been who they were without the Tractatus.

Monk briefly touches on Wittgenstein's theories, but if I had been expecting a detailed analysis of the picture theory, private-language, beetle-in-a-box, etc., I would have read Wittgenstein's own work. So, if you find the figure of Wittgenstein interesting, or if you are curious about how his life events and the influential books that inspired him (such as Wieninger's Sex and Character, Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, Spengler's The Decline of the West, detective hard-boiled fiction, William James' Varieties of Religious Experience, Tolstoy's Gospels in Brief) shaped his theories on psychology, mathematics, language, culture, etc., then this is the book for you. And as you can probably tell, for a man who chaired prestigious philosophy departments in the UK, he wasn't very knowledgeable about a lot of philosophy. Apparently, he never read Aristotle.

Also, this book is 600 pages long, and it took me a while to read because I was also reading other things. So, you really have to care about the subject to get through it.

Monk writes outstanding biographies. I was truly captivated by the Oppenheimer biography, and now here we have one on Ludwig Wittgenstein, the philosopher of logic, psychology, and mathematics, and the youngest son of the large and prosperous Wittgenstein family in Vienna.

Before reading this, I knew very little about Wittgenstein as a person and even less about his philosophy. This biography serves as an excellent introduction to Wittgenstein's philosophy. His writing is renowned for being concentrated into sentences as concise as possible. Here, you get explanations from discussions with other philosophers or from the lectures he held.

Some things that caught my attention:

- Many "famous" names make an appearance. Hitler was in the same school class as Wittgenstein in Vienna for one year. Later, Popper, Feyerabend, and Turing all had discussions or arguments with him. And of course, his professors at university, like Russell or Frege, are prominently featured, up to their eventual falling-out.

- Monk manages to show all the times when Wittgenstein was strangely naive without passing judgment. I find it hard to believe that a 50-ish year old Professor of Philosophy could seriously consider becoming a "manual laborer" in Soviet Russia. Soviet Russia didn't really want him either, as Monk quotes: "The one thing that was not in short supply in Soviet Russia was unskilled labor." However, Monk defends Wittgenstein's remarks to Drury on the eve of Austria's Anschluss to Hitler's Germany, suggesting that Wittgenstein was trying not to worry Drury too much about his family's situation. I'm not entirely convinced.

- The intense part of Wittgenstein's personality is very well portrayed. It was apparently very difficult to be around him or engage in "small-talk". In philosophical discussions, his directness was often abrupt to the point of being rude. This is how he wanted to prepare for a wedding: "Early in the summer he invited Marguerite to Norway to prepare, as he thought, for their future life together. He intended, however, that they should spend their time separately, each taking advantage of the isolation to engage in serious contemplation, so that they would be spiritually ready for the new life that was to come." As expected, she left after two weeks.

- He wouldn't survive in today's academia. He published very little, and most of his work was published posthumously. His teaching was kept "under wraps". In order to keep his class size manageable, he didn't announce his lectures in the usual way. Instead, John Wisdom, Moore, and Braithwaite were asked to tell the students they thought would be interested. No more than about ten students attended. This would be impossible in the age of standardized tests, degrees, and the Bologna process.

- Wittgenstein's remarks and Monk's expansion on logic and concepts not being as simple as logicians would like them to be are truly eye-opening and recommended reading.

- In his remarks about language, I'm reminded of Stanislaw Lem's SF. "This is because the commonality of experience required to interpret the 'imponderable evidence', the'subtleties of glance, gesture and tone', will be missing. This idea is summed up in one of Wittgenstein's most striking aphorisms: 'If a lion could talk, we could not understand him.'" Most of Lem's SF is about mankind encountering talking lions!

- Wittgenstein's very dry humor is amazing and is noted in many episodes, like this one: "Never having seen Wittgenstein before, he [Mabbott] assumed that this [Wittgenstein] was a student on vacation who did not know this hostel had been given over to those attending the conference. 'I'm afraid there is a gathering of philosophers going on here', he said kindly. Wittgenstein replied darkly: 'I too'."

Wittgenstein, a philosopher who pushed aside the dark clouds of philosophy, and his slogan was "In the beginning was the deed."

The only life worth living is a life in the direction of a duty that one has towards oneself, towards one's excellence. This sentence is undoubtedly an accurate description of Ludwig Wittgenstein, a complex, serious, and secluded genius; a philosopher who often thought of suicide in his youth and questioned his existence in this world. But when Bertrand Russell recognized his philosophical genius and accepted him as his student, Wittgenstein was able to overcome this feeling of despair. This shows that he had accepted this belief with all his being, in the strongest possible way.

Wittgenstein initially worked as an engineer and even patented an invention titled "Improvements in carburetors for use in aircraft engines." However, his first philosophical reflections began in childhood. At the age of eight, he asked himself: "Why should one tell the truth when lying is beneficial to a person?" This inquisitive mind, after later hearing Russell's words, decided to replace engineering with philosophy. Russell, undoubtedly, had a profound impact on the young Wittgenstein, but at the same time, it was Wittgenstein who, with his unique genius and seriousness, also influenced Russell. His discussions in the field of mathematical logic were such that Russell later admitted that Wittgenstein was a great event in his life.

He believed so strongly in his duty and mission in philosophy that he thought if he could not solve a fundamental problem in logic, he did not deserve to live. His determination and intellectual enthusiasm in fulfilling his duties were such that during World War II, when he worked in a pharmacy laboratory, he made a skin cream of such quality that one of the hospital workers said: "No one had ever made such a lubricating cream before." He even designed a device for measuring the pulse that amazed the doctors.

The determination to keep hidden what one is, was the core of Wittgenstein's thinking. He believed that nothing should come between a philosopher and the search for truth. For this reason, in his view, a philosopher is not a socializer of ideas, and this is what makes him a philosopher. The influence of his ideas was so widespread that even the Vienna Circle, which is now considered the core of logical positivism, benefited from his teachings and named their principle of verifiability after him.

P.S: Morad Farhadpour also has an attractive and readable introduction to this book.

The enigmatic name "Wittgenstein" has frequently emerged in the novels I've been reading. Recently, I read "Austral" by Carlos Fonseca and "Austerlitz" by W.G. Sebald back-to-back. Chosen by chance and seemingly unconnected, both surprisingly referred to the man and his work. As a result, I decided it was time to read "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" by Ludwig Wittgenstein. I grabbed a new translation and took it on a city break. However, it was a mistake. I read it during museum visits, on the Metro train, and in my hotel bed. I repeatedly re-read passages, trying to unlock their meaning, but it was like an austere poem full of symbols, a cosmic code or a prayer.

I was intrigued, not so much by the concepts but by the enigma. Who would write like this? Who would use such metaphors? His astonishing biography has given me some access to that "soul". Wittgenstein is a "rewarding character", and this book reads like a thriller. Monk has left a significant amount of space for Wittgenstein and the people of his time to speak directly.

So, who was the man? I recommend Monk's narrative to find out more. But when I think about his life, I don't think of a narrative. Instead, I think of a list of seven "propositions". Firstly, Wittgenstein tried to live a good life. He went to war, gave up his fortune, taught children in poor villages, and worked in a hospital during WWII. He also advised his students to give up academic careers and do something useful. Secondly, he was a genius with high stakes and a high bar for himself and everyone else. Thirdly, he fought pride and vanity but often lost the fight. He had strong views that sometimes reflected the worst prejudices of his time, and he was intolerant of other opinions and people. Fourthly, he exhibited solipsism in both his philosophy and personal life. Fifthly, he lived and thought more like a sage, with strong mystical elements in his early views. Sixthly, he started by solving all philosophical problems and ended by pointing out that there were no problems as such, just confusions. Finally, his disposition was that of an artist, intuitive and moody. He believed he was only reproductively thinking and that his greatest talent was inventing new similes. Inventing "new similes" seemed to be a worthwhile occupation in his life.

Wittgenstein was a philosopher of great significance. His life was as intense and interesting as his philosophy. Growing up in the home of one of the richest men in the Austro-Hungarian empire, he was exposed to a hothouse atmosphere of aesthetics and intellect in Vienna. This led him to believe that only a life of intellectual and moral genius was truly valuable. Even after achieving success in philosophy in England with Bertrand Russell, he sought solitude in Norway. He joined the Austrian army in the Great War to test himself and wrote his first major work, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, in the trenches. After the war, feeling a lack in his life, he taught young children in Austria. His later philosophy took a different direction, challenging the logical positivists. Ray Monk's book provides a detailed account of Wittgenstein's thought and life, including his relationships. I have also written about Wittgenstein in my book Loners: Writers, Thinkers, and Solitude and a novel Wittgenstein in Late Autumn. You can read excerpts of both for free at the provided links.

Wittgenstein's life and philosophy continue to fascinate and inspire. His ideas have had a profound impact on various fields, and his pursuit of truth and meaning serves as an example for us all.

Ray Monk's work offers a comprehensive and insightful look into Wittgenstein's world, making it an essential read for anyone interested in philosophy or intellectual history.

My own writings on Wittgenstein aim to further explore his ideas and bring his story to a wider audience.

Whether you are a philosopher, a student, or simply someone curious about the human mind, Wittgenstein has much to offer.

So, take the time to discover his work and life, and be prepared to be challenged and enlightened.