Was it autism?

I don't know because you can't know nuffin

What's an entry level work to get into his philosophy?

>>528573
You don't

Considering those with high IQs are more likely to have mental illnesses, it's possible.

>>528560

Can some one give me a too long didn't read for an newbie?

I can't even understand the Wikipedia article about his work

>>529255
The world is the world. Even the most complex systems can be reduced to a handful of "atomic" facts that make the system up. Language can express these facts. If it can't be logically expressed it's meaningless. That's about it

>>528573
He only wrote 3 books....figure it out yourself

The thing is he ended up refuting the central point of his 1st book in his later one so it's a question of how much you want to read.

>>528573
Wittgenstein noob here (be gentle). The biography "The Duty of Genius" by Ray Monk is really good at showing why so many people are fascinated about his personality, but apart from two or three general examples of his thoughts Monk leaves his philosophy almost untouched. William Warren Bartley's biography of him is very famous for pointing out his alleged preference for male prostitutes which caused a hell of ontroversy, but also features some nice, beginner-friendly chapters about the state of philosophy when Wittgenstein got into it and what the problems were that made him think about the stuff he wrote about.

>>528573
You can't

Read other people and Ludwig's bio then try and read his work. You'll probably not understand it but at least yo can say you read him

>>528573
read many critiques and guides along the way

I forgot, there is a famous one you can buy it off amazon, considered authoritative by modern scholars now

>>529343
Wittgenstein is very clear. It's straightforward to read him, I don't understand how people think it's all over their heads, instead he tries to do the opposite.

There's a reason philosophy became easier to read after him

>>528560
Yes.

>>528573
Suicide.

Nobody should be allowed to talk about Wittgenstein unless they've got a degree and did their dissertation on him. So sick of fucking morons talking about Wittgenstein

>>529862
>There's a reason philosophy became easier to read after him

Nope. Just stop. Everything you're saying is bad. You're a bad person. Go away.

>>529887
muh super complex philosopher man

File: pic5.jpg (128KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 900x675px

>>529887
Do you moderate more than a dozen subreddits by any chance?

File: image.jpg (64KB, 578x800px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 578x800px

>>528560

> What is autism?

A mere ad hominem, tossed at thinkers who are too detailed and comprehensive for the average reader's attention span.

>>528573
He was such an autist that he produced only the Tractatus and then declared that he had "answered" the question of philosophy. The posthumous publication of his late-in-life notes are the only indication that he ultimately admitted the Tractatus to be an imperfect account of logic and the function of language.

He also had a nasty penchant for beating schoolchildren.

File: sadsnoo.png (16KB, 350x117px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 350x117px

>>530013
Yes...

>>528560
More like genius. All the babbies who started philosophy with Nietzsche can't see it because they're so wrapped up in their continental babble and think things like the human condition and ethics are actually relevant. This man did real philosophy

File: positivist.png (346KB, 1829x788px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1829x788px

>>530625

>>530645
Wittgenstein wasn't a positivist you retard. You can be an analytic without adhering to scientism

>>529308

No.

>>529896

The problem with those trying to read Wittgenstein, especially with the TLP, is that go in with this preconception that he's a weird quasi- mustic, when in actuality everything is, as he says, all there before you.

Take home points from the TLP:

For language to refer to the world, it has to 'hook up' to it somehow. The hooking point is in the isomorphy of the logical structure of propositions and that which the proper names within propositions denote.
Tautologies and contradictions are neither true nor false. They are the limit cases which make logical operations possible.
Scientism a shit.

>>530013
https://www.reddit.com/user/mayonesa

>>529856
remember anon plz

>>530841


well said, sir

>>530791
>>530841
Scientism is a buzzword.

Yes. It also didn't kill philosophy. We won't actually grasp Wittgenstein's place in the history of philosophy for a few centuries. Unlike Hegel, who is as relevant today as he was when he was alive.

>>530818
Nope that's definitely it. Sorry I didn't take break the character limit to sum up your favorite autist

>>531565
>language can describe everything that can be described
>jk I was just pretending to be retarded lol. What doth words Lmao

Scintillating

>>532479

No. Your terms are confused and/or misleading, Wittgenstein isn't concerned with 'systems', and you've passed over the actually interesting points he was making, or trying to make.

He was probably autistic sure, but the book was pretty good, if you like logical positivism.

If you're interested in more refined philosophy though you shouldn't read logic.

>>532491
Who gives a shit I got the gist of your autismal child-beating wunderkind

>>528560
Doubtlessly.

>>528612
Autism is a neuro condition not a mental illness buddy.

>>532506

You didn't, though, which is probably why you've moved so quickly to ad hominem.

>>532515
Sure I didn't m8

You sound like one of those faggots who goes into hysterics if someone tries to summarize Hegels thought

>>532526

I'm doing you a favor pointing out your ignorance. You should take this as an opportunity to teach yourself something. Little energy need be expended, you could just read the SEP article and you'd be more informed than you are now.

>>532539
>to teach yourself something.

He won't. He'll just keep memeing you into oblivion.

>>532539
Or you can do me a favor by pointing out exactly where I went wrong instead of 'you used the wrong words lmao'

>>532552

You went wrong from the very first sentence. It would have actually been a clever little bit if you knew what you were doing. But you didn't, and it isn't.

Your assignment is to figure out what was unintentionally apposite about it. I'm in the gym until 1, but I'll check back on your progress.

>>532552
>>532624

Surely someone who knew what they were taking about would easily be able to reason through and explain something so basic.

Very disappointing.

File: images.jpg (6KB, 233x206px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 233x206px

>>533239
>Easily explain Wittgensten

>>533253

Read the thread before you post.

>>533253
dude he thought perfectly logical language could solve everything and then he changed his mind and realized people use words they don't know the exact definition of all the time so meaning is culturally/socially imposed on language instead of the reverse

there's more to it but he's not some fucking 6th density ascended master or something nigga gdamn