How Not to Read Philosophical Investigations: McDowell and Goldfarb on Wittgenstein on Understanding

In a recent article, John McDowell has criticised Warren Goldfarb for attributing an anti‐realist conception of linguistic understanding to Wittgenstein. 1 I argue that McDowell is right to reject Goldfarb's anti‐ realism, but does so for the wrong reasons. I show that both Goldfarb's and McDowell's interpretations are vitiated by the fact that they do not pay attention to Wittgenstein's positive claims about understanding, in particular his claim that understanding is a kind of ability. The cause of this oversight lies in their endorsement of an excessively anti‐systematic or “therapeutic” reading of Wittgenstein.     

Boltzmann and Wittgenstein or How Pictures Became Linguistic

Emphasis in historiography of science is naturally placed on the discoveries and inventions which scientists make and generally less on new methods of doing science, but sometimes the latter can he an important clue to help us understand the former. For example, while we all acknowledge how great the contributions of Maxwell, Boltzmann, Planck, and Einstein were to physics from roughly 1870 to 1920, we often overlook the significance of a methodological phrase which was popular during that same period, namely, what in German was called “Bildtheorie” or in English “picture theory”. But even before we can properly study its significance we have to know what the theory was, but even this presents problems, since the meaning changed. In fact, this paper is an attempt not only to describe the history of that change from Maxwell to Wittgenstein but to study in particular how Boltzmann’s conception of Bildtheorie seems to have been at least partly incorporated into the approach of Ludwig Wittgenstein. This revised version was published online in June 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

19世纪美北长老会在粤传教活动述论

美北长老会是所有来华基督新教中一重要差会。近代以来,它在中国开展了一系列活动,产生了深刻的社会影响。本文运用中英文献档案,分别从传教、教育、医疗三个方面论述美北长老会19世纪在广东的传播与发展情况,以期更加深入地展开对教会史的研究。     

Of Keys and Gifts: How to Read The Gift of Authority

Abstract

The Gift of Authority has received a cautious welcome from Anglicans. A reason for this, it is said, is that its language or culture are insufficiently Anglican. The article argues that this should not deter anyone because there are non-Anglican ecclesiologies – most notably that of Medard Kehl – which contain a vision of the Church that is basically the same as that behind The Gift, and which at the same time bear a close family resemblance to principles of Anglican ecclesiology. It is argued that using these as an Anglican ‘hermeneutical key’ to The Gift instead of focusing primarily on the language used, would substantially increase Anglican understanding and appreciation of the report.     

Kindergarten Bibliophiles in Their Own words: How They Learned to Read

Forty-four children, identified by their kindergarten teachers as independent readers upon public school entrance, were interviewed to assess their perceptions of how and when they learned to read. In addition to interviews, the children's literacy behaviors were observed in their normal classroom settings and in individual shared book experiences with fictional and non-fictional texts. Findings revealed commonalities in children's perceptions about how they learned to read, confirming research about the impact of the home environment on emergent literacy development. The children exhibited positive attitudes toward reading in all aspects of classroom instructional activities.     

Using Wittgenstein to Respecify Constructivism

Taking its orientation from Peter Winch, this article critiques from a Wittgensteinian point of view some “theoreticist” tendencies within constructivism. At the heart of constructivism is the deeply Wittgensteinian idea that the world as we know and understand it is the product of human intelligence and interests. The usefulness of this idea can be vitiated by a failure to distinguish conceptual from empirical questions. I argue that such a failure characterises two influential constructivist theories, those of Ernst von Glasersfeld and David Bloor. These are considered in turn. Both theories seek to give a general, causal account of knowledge: von Glasersfeld's in term of cognitive subjectivity, Bloor's in terms of social agreement. Ironically, given that both writers cite Wittgenstein as a source of theoretical inspiration, assumptions of both theories run counter to key Wittgensteinian arguments. To show that Wittgenstein's views offer no solace to the realist, the article closes with a brief consideration of John Searle's theory of knowledge.     

Nominalism and Realism. How Not to Read the Tractatus' Conception of a Name

This paper focuses on a central aspect of the “picture theory” in the Tractatus – the “identity requirement” – namely the idea that a proposition represents elements in reality as combined in the same way as its elements are combined. After introducing the Tractatus' views on the nature of the proposition, I engage with a “nominalist” interpretation, according to which the Tractatus holds that relations are not named in propositions. I claim that the nominalist account can only be maintained by rejecting the “identity requirement.” I then consider an opposite – “realist” – interpretation, according to which Tractarian names include names of properties and relations. I argue that, although it can accommodate the “identity requirement,” the realist interpretation falls short of providing a correct interpretation of the Tractatus' conception of a name. I conclude by presenting an alternative account (to both nominalism and realism) of the Tractatus' conception of a name.     

Communicating Developmental Science to Nonscientists,or How to Write Something Even Your Family Will Want to Read

ABSTRACT

Developmental psychologists are increasingly writing articles, columns, books, and blogs for the general public, but this type of writing can be challenging. Here, I provide guidance on how to communicate scientific ideas to nonscientists, touching on what content to cover, how to organize that content, what language to use, and what tone to adopt. I highlight common shortcomings in how we package and describe our academic pursuits, and provide alternative strategies for writing about research in a clear and compelling manner.     

Approaches to Wittgenstein: Collected Papers

Book reviewed:
Brian McGuinness, Approaches to Wittgenstein: Collected Papers , Routledge, 2002, xv + 299 pp, £55.00     

Reading Wittgenstein

Books reviewed in this essay:
Robert Arrington and Hans-Johann Glock (eds), Wittgenstein & Quine
John Koethe, The Continuity of Wittgenstein's Thought
P.M.S. Hacker, Wittgenstein's Place in Twentieth-Century Analytic Philosophy
Hans Sluga and David G. Stern (eds), The Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein
Marie McGinn, Wittgenstein and the Philosophical Investigations     

On Wittgenstein

Invited contributions were asked for statements of how they came to be acquainted with Wittgenstein's work, the influence it had on their own work, and how they see Wittgenstein in relation to prevalent trends in contemporary philosophy. The weight given to the various elements in the invitation was left to the discretion of the contributors. Contributions have also been included from the Rush Rhees and Peter Winch archives. (Ed.)
Articles by: Stanley Cavell, James Conant, Cora Diamond, İlham Dilman, P.M.S. Hacker, B.F. McGuinness, Anthony Palmer, D.Z. Phillips, Rush Rhees, Joachim Schulte, Eike von Savigny, Georg Henrik von Wright, and Peter Winch