Abstract
If anniversaries may be considered as a potential call for historical reflection, or at least for reflection with historical sensitivity and awareness, then the centenary of the publication of Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus makes the examination of Wittgenstein’s early work in its broader historical context quite apposite. The present chapter aims to contribute to the relevant discussions by focusing on the relation of both the early Wittgenstein and the Tractatus to their times, aspiring in the end to provide a different understanding of the early phase of Wittgenstein’s thought. More specifically, the chapter highlights, first, some of the connections that can be drawn between Wittgenstein’s early philosophical outlook and various—sometimes converging, other times diverging, or even contradicting—aspects of modernism and modernity. Then, it discusses in some more detail the peculiar character of the Tractatus as a modernist, immanent critique of modernity, that is, as an attempted critique of (certain qualities of) modernity from within. Finally, the chapter concludes with a few thoughts on the legacy, present status, and possible future pathways of the Tractatus.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
At the same time, according to Wittgenstein, the primary point of the Tractatus is an ethical one and the most important part of his early work is the one that remained—necessarily, since ineffable—unwritten (see von Wright 1982, 83). The exploration of the context of Wittgenstein’s early life and work may thus be also viewed as an attempt to shade some more light onto these obscure aspects of the Tractatus.
- 2.
See for example Janik and Toulmin (1973), Eagleton (1993), Paden (2007), Ware (2015), LeMahieu and Zumhagen-Yekplé (ed.) (2017) and Matar (ed.) (2017) in regard to Wittgenstein and modernism, and von Wright (1982), McGuinness (ed.) (1982), Cavell (1989), Bouveresse (1991), DeAngelis (2007), and Klagge (2011) in regard to Wittgenstein and modernity.
- 3.
For more on the idea of ‘family-resemblance’ concepts, see PI 65–69.
- 4.
- 5.
For more on Kraus, see Janik and Toulmin (1973), 67–91.
- 6.
- 7.
For more on Mauthner, see Janik and Toulmin (1973), 120–132. Mauthner is one of the very few philosophers mentioned by name in the Tractatus and although Wittgenstein differentiates his own Sprachkritik from the one of Mauthner (see TLP 4.0031), there is still a number of resemblances to be found between their works (see Weiler 1958).
- 8.
Note that later in his life Wittgenstein would develop an affection for Western movies and pulp detective fiction as well (see Monk 1991, 239, 266, 355, 422–427, 443, 528–529, 577).
- 9.
For more on Wittgenstein’s architecture and its relation to his philosophy see Paden (2007).
- 10.
See Eagleton (1993), 5–6. While Eagleton follows to a large extent Greenberg’s approach to modernism as “the use of characteristic methods of a discipline to criticize the discipline itself” (see Greenberg 1973, 67), Greenberg takes Kant to be the first “real Modernist”, since Kant was the first to criticize the means itself of criticism. From such a perspective, the Tractatus may be viewed not as “the first great work of philosophical modernism” as Eagleton argues, but as the high point and culmination of (philosophical) modernism as initiated by Kant.
- 11.
It should be noted that the links with formalism and constructivism are not exhausted in the literary style of the Tractatus, but actually extend to its content as well. Consider how formalism characterizes the Tractatus in general—from the formal concepts employed in the work and the formal unity between their attributes and their (inter)relations to the theory of (logical) symbolism and the general propositional form (see, e.g., TLP 3.32-3.3442, 4.122-4.1274, 6-6.031)—or the constructivist aspects of both Wittgenstein’s version of logical atomism as developed in the Tractatus and the key role that compositionality plays in the work (see, e.g., TLP 2-2.034, 3.22-3.318, 4.21-4.2211, 4.466-5.1363). See also Galison (1990) for a discussion, also in relation to formalism and constructivism, of the points of convergence between formal logical analysis (a la Vienna Circle) and architectural modernism (a la Bauhaus).
- 12.
According to Wittgenstein, the Tractatus is “the presentation of a system” (see Monk 1991, 176–177).
- 13.
For more on the Tractatus as a manifesto, see Puchner (2005).
- 14.
See, e.g., von Wright (1982), 201–216 and DeAngelis (2007). Wittgenstein indeed mentions Spengler among his influences and actually employs in the ‘Sketch for a Foreword’ the Spenglerian distinction between culture and civilization, declaring that even if he does not take the disappearance of culture, as (purportedly) taking place in the modern world, to be indicative of the disappearance of human value, he still contemplates “the current of European civilization without sympathy, without understanding its aims if any” (see CV 8–9, 16).
- 15.
See, e.g., CV 55–56 where, in a rather tongue-in-cheek manner, he appears ambivalent toward the prospect of nuclear destruction.
- 16.
- 17.
For more on the approach to the Tractatus as a coherent whole, see Stokhof (2002), 4–6.
- 18.
Consider how Wittgenstein views his approach in the Tractatus as the “only rigorous way” of drawing the limits of the ethical (see von Wright 1982, 83), as the base for the “right method of philosophy” and as resulting in the solution of (all) philosophical problems (see TLP Preface, 6.53), as well as the intrinsic relation between logic and ethics in the Tractatus, as they both are transcendental, ineffable, and conditions/limits of the world and they both cannot be spoken of or depictured, but only show themselves (see, e.g., TLP 4.0312, 6.124, 6.13, 6.421, 6.45, 6.522).
- 19.
It should be noted that internal critique is not exhausted in immanent critique. Internal critique is a form of critique that accepts or assumes the object of critique (e.g., system, theory) as true or given and which by examining the object of critique identifies certain problematic points. Immanent critique, as a form of internal critique, also accepts or assumes the object of critique (e.g., system, theory) as true or given, but through the examination of the object of critique on the basis of its own standards and commitments usually aims at identifying certain internal logical fallacies, typically contradictions. For examples of non-immanent internal critiques consider those types of internal critique that focus on tracing blind spots, uncovered areas, or lacunae with regard to systems or theories. Likewise, external critique, a form of critique that examines or assesses the very truth, validity, legitimacy, utility, or status of its object without presupposing them, is not exhausted in transcendent critique, which constitutes a type of external critique based on standards and commitments that are somehow external to or incompatible with its object. For examples of non-transcendent external critiques consider genealogical, deconstructivist, and in general post-structuralist types of critique or even the later Wittgenstein’s “sketches of landscapes” through his journeyings over “a wide field of thought criss-cross in every direction” (see PI Preface).
- 20.
- 21.
The concept of immanent critique has a long and rich history, which is paradigmatically traced in the philosophical lineage that starts with Hegel, continues with Marx, and reaches its highpoint with Frankfurt School critical theory, especially Adorno. For more on immanent critique and some of the various forms it may take see Stahl (2013) and Becker (2020).
- 22.
Wittgenstein not only considered the Tractatus a system, as already noted (see Monk 1991, 176–177), but actually a system which he tried to improve up until 1929 as his discussions in ‘Some Remarks on Logical Form’ suggest (see Wittgenstein 1993a). The reformist characteristics of the Tractarian immanent critique are in line with Janik’s categorization of Wittgenstein as a critical modernist as well as with Greenberg’s conception of modernism as “the use of characteristic methods of a discipline to criticize the discipline itself, not in order to subvert it but in order to entrench it more firmly in its area of competence” (see Greenberg 1973, 67).
- 23.
The tension between the reformist and the radical aspects of the Tractarian immanent critique of modernity may be viewed as reflected in the ‘New Wittgenstein’ debate, with the (so-called) traditional readings of the Tractatus favoring the reformist aspects of its critique and the (so-called) resolute or therapeutic readings favoring the radical ones—for more on the ‘New Wittgenstein’ debate, see Crary and Read (eds.) (2000), Proops (2001), and Stokhof (2011).
- 24.
An approach toward which Wittgenstein seems to gesture himself as we can see in the preface of the Philosophical Investigations.
- 25.
See also CV 70 for Wittgenstein’s own reservations regarding Wittgenstein scholarship and scholasticism.
- 26.
While paradoxes (e.g., regarding time and space) play a crucial role in many of the films of both Lynch and Nolan, they are mostly understood and employed in different ways by the two filmmakers, since in the works of Lynch (e.g., Twin Peaks, Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive) paradoxes usually take the form of dream-like mystical or other-worldly experiences, while in the works of Nolan (e.g., Inception, Interstellar, Tenet) they often may be viewed as (quasi-logical) riddles that need to be (re)solved.
- 27.
I would like to thank Martin Stokhof and Hao Tang for their valuable feedback on an earlier draft of this chapter.
References
Becker, Michael. 2020. On Immanent Critique in Hegel’s Phenomenology. Hegel Bulletin 41 (2): 224–246.
Bouveresse, Jacques. 1991. “The Darkness of this Time”: Wittgenstein and the Modern World. In Wittgenstein: Centenary Essays, ed. A. Griffiths, 11–39. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cavell, Stanley. 1989. Declining Decline: Wittgenstein as a Philosopher of Culture. In This New Yet Unapproachable America: Lectures After Emerson and Wittgenstein, 29–75. Albuquerque: Living Batch Press.
Conant, James. 2001. Philosophy and Biography. In Wittgenstein: Biography and Philosophy, ed. J.C. Klagge, 16–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crary, Alice, and Rupert Read, eds. 2000. The New Wittgenstein. London: Routledge.
DeAngelis, William James. 2007. Ludwig Wittgenstein – A Cultural Point of View: Philosophy in the Darkness of this Time. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Eagleton, Terry. 1993. Introduction to Wittgenstein. In Wittgenstein: The Terry Eagleton Script/The Derek Jarman Film, 5–13. Worcester: The Trinity Press.
Foucault, Michel. 1984. What is Enlightenment? In The Foucault Reader, ed. Rabinow, 32–50. New York: Pantheon.
Galison, Peter. 1990. Aufbau/Bauhaus: Logical Positivism and Architectural Modernism. Critical Inquiry 16 (4): 709–752.
Greenberg, Clement. 1973. Modernist Painting. In The New Art: A Critical Anthology, ed. G. Battcock, Rev. ed., 66–77. New York: Dutton.
Habermas, Jürgen. 1991. Modernity: An Unfinished Project. In Critical Theory: The Essential Readings, ed. D. Ingram and J. Simon-Ingram, 158–169. New York: Paragon House.
Janik, Allan. 2001. Vienna 1900 Revisited: Paradigms and Problems. In Rethinking Vienna 1900, ed. S. Beller, 27–56. New York: Berghahn.
Janik, Allan, and Stephen Toulmin. 1973. Wittgenstein’s Vienna. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Kitching, Gavin. 2003. Resolutely Ethical: Wittgenstein, the Dogmatism of Analysis and Contemporary Wittgensteinian Scholarship. In Wittgenstein and Society: Essays in Conceptual Puzzlement, 179–221. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Klagge, James. 2011. Wittgenstein in Exile. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
LeMahieu, Michael, and Karen Zumhagen-Yekplé, eds. 2017. Wittgenstein and Modernism. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Matar, Anat, ed. 2017. Understanding Wittgenstein, Understanding Modernism. New York: Bloomsbury.
McGuinness, Brian. 1988. Wittgenstein: A Life. Young Ludwig (1889–1921). London: Penguin.
———, ed. 1982. Wittgenstein and His Times. Oxford: Blackwell.
Monk, Ray. 1991. Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius. London: Vintage.
Negri, Antonio, and Anne Dufourmantelle. 2004. Negri on Negri: Antonio Negri in Conversation with Anne Dufourmantelle. New York: Routledge.
Nyiri, Kristof. 1982. Wittgenstein’s Later Work in Relation to Conservatism. In Wittgenstein and His Times, ed. B. McGuinness, 44–68. Oxford: Blackwell.
Paden, Roger. 2007. Mysticism and Architecture: Wittgenstein and the Meanings of the Palais Stonborough. Lanham: Lexington.
Proops, Ian. 2001. The New Wittgenstein: A Critique. European Journal of Philosophy 9 (3): 375–404.
Puchner, Martin. 2005. Doing Logic with a Hammer: Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and the Polemics of Logical Positivism. Journal of the History of Ideas 66 (2): 285–300.
Rhees, Rush, ed. 1981. Ludwig Wittgenstein: Personal Recollections. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stahl, Titus. 2013. ‘What is Immanent Critique?’ SSRN Working Papers. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2357957
Stokhof, Martin. 2011. The Quest for Purity: Another Look at the New Wittgenstein. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 11 (33): 275–294.
———. 2002. World and Life as One: Ethics and Ontology in Wittgenstein’s Early Thought. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Toulmin, Stephen. 1990. Cosmopolis: The Hidden Agenda of Modernity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ware, Ben. 2015. The Dialectic of the Ladder – Wittgenstein, the Tractatus, and Modernism. London: Bloomsbury.
Weiler, Gershon. 1958. On Fritz Mauthner’s Critique of Language. Mind 67 (265): 80–87.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1922. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
———. 1969. The Blue and Brown Books: Preliminary Studies for the Philosophical Investigations. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
———. 1979a. Notebooks 1914–1916. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell.
———. 1979b. Wittgenstein’s Lectures Cambridge 1932–35, From the Notes of Alice Ambrose and Margaret MacDonald. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
———. 1993a. Some Remarks on Logical Form. In Ludwig Wittgenstein: Philosophical Occasions 1912–1951, ed. J. Klagge and A. Nordmann, 29–35. Indianapolis: Hackett.
———. 1993b. A Lecture on Ethics. In Ludwig Wittgenstein: Philosophical Occasions 1912–1951, ed. J. Klagge and A. Nordmann, 36–44. Indianapolis: Hackett.
———. 1998. Culture and Value (rev. 2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
———. 2001. Philosophical Investigations (rev. 3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
———. 2008. Wittgenstein in Cambridge: Letters and Documents 1911–1951. Oxford: Blackwell.
von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1982. Wittgenstein. Oxford: Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gakis, D. (2023). Wittgenstein’s Tractatus in Context: Modernity and its Critique. In: Stokhof, M., Tang, H. (eds) Wittgenstein's Tractatus at 100. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29863-9_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29863-9_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-29862-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-29863-9
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)