Is Wittgenstein a step beyond Nietzsche in any way? If so, how?

Straighten up your question, you stupid little shit.

>>8325879
No. The two have little, if anything, in common except that they both really thought they had a solution to beat "old philosophy" for a hot minute.

>>8325921
This. Though, to directly answer your question: nah. Neech is still more influential. Wittgenstein just thinks he out-philosophied philosophy when in reality the logic of the Tractatus doesn't add up (both on the microscopic, analytic level where his syntax is just blatantly wrong, and on the macro level of the 1-7 proclamations where #7 is an embarassingly earnest leap for someone supposedly commited to logic); the Blue and Brown Books are scattered and contradictory, to say the least; and, the PI is rather silly and, ultimately, a boring observation about language moreso than it is about philosophy.

>>8325936
Witty was important in crushing logical fedoraism

>>8325936
What are you even saying

>>8325936
>scattered and contradictory
Whose work are you describing again?

>>8326268
>>8325936

He's broadcasting his ignorance.

>>8325936
you didn't understand Wittgenstein

>>8326380
You don't understand rudimentary logic. The Tractatus is quite literally bad logic. Take a formal class, re-read it w/o your puffed up continental conceptions of it "ending all philosophy," and you'll quickly see his logical atomism, like every other positivist of the era, is broken as fuck.

>>8326268
found the pleb

>>8327029
>like every other positivist
You're an idiot

>>8326293
Wittgenstein. Have you read either of the books? They're based on compiled lecture notes so they come out as a hodge podge regardless of the intended content. And as the content stands, he gives his ideas in such a way that no one may understand them fully, except fr himself, and what can be gleemed from them is circular, incomplete bullshit.

>>8327044
No you are. Show me how Wittgenstein is A) starkly dofferent from every other positivist and B) How positivism wasen't a failed project.

>>8327058
Because he vehemently discredited his work in the Tractatus later on. . .

>>8327163
So you're saying a renunciation of one's work alleviates their status as having worked in a particular field?

My comment which you responded to, was on the Tractatus very obviously. In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein is very clearly a positivist.

If you wanna talk the B&B Books, or the PI, that's a different. That's when Wittt shacks up with Phil. Of Language in a silly, trite way.

But you're just baiting so good job. Hope Wikipedia and the Wittgenstein movie have served you well.

>>8327058
>states that the most important part of the book is the part that isn't there
>is a prick to the vienna circle and reads poetry during their meetings
>insists all throughout his life no one understood his work

>is a positivist
You're an idiot.

>>8327243
>Hasen't read the Tractatus
>Takes the biographical approach to understanding a philosopher's work
>Mentions incidents and anecdotes far removed from the actual work being discussed

Your unfounded fanboyism is showing. Please just stop.

>>8327216
No kidding he's a positivist on the Tractatus. You are fucking brain dead kid.

>>8327216
>>8327349
I get the feeling no one in this thread knows what the fuck they're talking about. Not sure if this was bait or what, but can OP explain why he would think Wittgenstein is a step beyond Nietzsche? From what I know of both of them, they don't have much overlap in schools of thought or method. If OP is referring to philosophy in general, I'd make the case that Heideggar, not Wittgenstein, goes beyond Nietzsche. And if we follow this weird linear approach of philosophers surpassing each other to be "le most philosophy" I can think of at least five thinkers in the analytic tradition that crush Wittgenstein and a handful people I prefer over Nietzsche any day.

>>8327464

>fell for the Heidegger meme

>>8327464
Reading Wittgenstein as an 'analytic philosopher' is an embarrassing misreading.

>>8327464
>I can think of at least five thinkers in the analytic tradition that crush Wittgenstein
Names fucker

>>8327474
I know he's not strictly analytic, anon. It's just easier in my mind to group him in with other analytics because I read him in a "20th Century Analytic" class. And idk how anyone could have a "good reading" of Wittgenstein except Ludwig himself.

*tips fedora back*

>>8327485
From my reading, I was more impressed with Frege, Russell, Quine, Kripke (who took the most to get into, though I think his reading of Wittgenstein does a better job of Wittgenstein than Wittgenstein himself intended), and Chalmers (who's just downright fun).

>>8327485
There are a slew of post Wittgensteinian analytics that are more "relevant" to that side of things. Personally I think it's silly to even suggest them, because I don't believe Wittgenstein's project is congruous with a bunch of pedantic mongs.

>>8325936


>Philosophical Investigations
>silly

well lad if you're not up for philosophy you should comment in the DFW threads

>>8327323
>>Takes the biographical approach to understanding a philosopher's work
You sound like the most autistic fucking analytic ever. I bet you're the kind of guy who likes Timothy Williamson.

>>8327499
>Kripke (who took the most to get into, though I think his reading of Wittgenstein does a better job of Wittgenstein than Wittgenstein himself intended)
You do realise Kripke is used by scholars as basically a prime example of how to misinterpret Wittgenstein?

>>8325879
There are some interesting overlaps, particularly noticeable if you read On Truth and Lies. Nietzsche because of this essay is sometimes called a kind of proto-pragmatist, and modern day pragmatists also love Wittgenstein. Is Witty "a step beyond"? Well, his views on language are obviously more sophisticated, but they were concerned with different things. I'd say they're complimentary.

You're welcome for actually answering the fucking question.

>>8327631
>You're welcome for my utter failure
Gee thanks.

>>8327598
>a better job of Wittgenstein than Wittgenstein himself intended
Not that anon but it seems so.

>>8327598
Lel Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language isn't Kripke's only work. He's done a decent amount on modal logic and reference. Moreover, even though Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language is seen as a misinterpretation, it's also generally held to raise important points about rule following.

>>8327598
Maybe you misunderstood my statement. I'm aware that Kripkenstein has its criticism, but, again, I find this supposed "misreading" to be more enlightening than the Philosophical Investigations itself, which is why I claimed I think Kripke is a step beyond Wittgenstein.

>>8327592
>Valid criticism of a long-dismissed, bad philosophical approach
>Anon insults w/ "analytic" label
>Anon thinks this is an insult

>>8327631
I can kinda see this, but Nietzsche as a pragmatist is to misread him as folks often do the Stoics and Aristotle. I'd say both were onto different projects entirely and leave it at that. If anon wants a successor to Nietzsche he better stick to the tradition. And also
>End-all-be-all philosopher meme
Thats not how it works OP

File: tmp_5285-Witt-1548446198.jpg (50KB, 635x854px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 635x854px

>>8327739
>>End-all-be-all philosopher meme
>Thats not how it works

>>8325879
A step towards rudimentary logic is a step far below Nietzsche. Wittgenstein is more like an Enlightenment thinker with his head even further up his ass than they were.

Yes. Wittgenstein is closer to Heidegger. Both have moved beyond Nietzsche.