Shop now Shop now Shop now Up to 70% off Fashion Shop All Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Learn More Amazon Pantry Food & Drink Beauty Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Shop now Shop now
Customer Review

56 of 57 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Brilliant biography and exposition, 11 Mar. 2005
This review is from: Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius (Paperback)
Wittgenstein's philosophical writings are very difficult, not only in content but also in presentation. He was always unhappy about committing his ideas to paper, and when he did so, he would set them down in a highly compressed form as numbered notes, sometimes in the form of aphorisms. When he sent the manuscript of the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus to Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, neither of these considerable intellects could understand it (which didn't stop Russell from writing a foreword when it was eventually published.)

The 650 pages of Monk's magnificent biography are of course anything but compressed, and allow us to understand how Wittgenstein arrived at his conclusions. Monk writes beautifully, and he sets out the intellectual processes with the utmost clarity; but an additional and very special merit of this book is the skilful interweaving of Wittgenstein's thought and his personality.

Wittgenstein was a tortured and difficult man: intense, introspective, uncompromising, ruthlessly honest with himself and with others. He was torn between his need for solitude and his need for philosophical discussion. There was within him an immense tension between logic and mysticism. He feared madness and was frequently uncertain about the value of philosophy: he gave it up altogether for a few years after the First World War and taught for six years at elementary schools in backward rural areas of Austria. In later life he was a practising but ashamed homosexual, and for this and other reasons often felt "indecent" and suicidal. He found friendship and even elementary courtesies difficult unless there was a total identity of philosophical ideals. But his charisma was such that a number of people were devoted to him, forgave his often savage moods and harsh outbursts, and helped him: transcribing his ideas; securing him a Fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge in 1930 and a Professorship in 1939; giving him a home in his last illness.

Monk handles with particular skill the transition between Wittgenstein's two philosophies. The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus laid down the foundations of what would become Logical Positivism, though Wittgenstein felt, from his first contact with the Vienna Logical Positivists, that his concerns were different from theirs. They were primarily concerned with the verification of propositions; but in the Tractatus Wittgenstein held that the only task for which philosophy was equipped was that of clarifying what we say by analyzing the language we use. This means examining the logical structure of language; but at the end of the process we have not said anything about the validity of the propositions that have been clarified. Whether a proposition is true or false is not ascertained by logical deductions but by whether it pictures the world as it actually is. Religious, ethical or aesthetic propositions cannot, said Wittgenstein, picture the world as it is, and it is therefore not possible for such topics to be meaningfully discussed. Therefore, in the famous last sentence of the Tractatus: "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence."

The Vienna School and the Logical Positivists were perfectly happy to have the realm of philosophy thus circumscribed; they felt no regret about the exclusion of religion and ethics from meaningful philosophical discourse. But Wittgenstein did suffer from this loss, and felt that the Vienna School had misunderstood him. He had already told his publishers that what the Tractatus did not contain was more important than what it did contain. He had to say more about those areas which he had felt forced to pass over in silence. Religious utterance could contain a truth and a meaning which did not depend on words having a very precise meaning, but on an understanding of how religious language is used; and this understanding is gained from the experience of living a religious life.

Indeed, in the posthumously published Philosophical Investigations Wittgenstein shifted his attention from the relationship between meaning and truth to that between meaning and use. Language, in other words, is not a picture, but a tool; and it is the way we use it that shows the meaning we ascribe to it. "Don't ask for the meaning; ask for the use", Wittgenstein now proclaimed; that, he thought, would at last "showing the fly a way out of the fly-bottle." Though it is still descriptive rather than deductive, the task of philosophy is now to clarify the way words are used in different situations rather than to pin down the absolute meaning of a word to some unchanging fact in reality. To my mind it is a much richer and less arid philosophy than his earlier one; and Wittgenstein worked out all kinds of fascinating implications of his new insight: it enabled him to see how, for example, music or humour or body language can be meaningful discourse which can be understood once you know how those particular languages are being used. The second philosophy is also much easier to understand than his first - so much so, in fact, that Russell accused him of having "grown tired of serious thinking". It certainly resulted in building a bridge between the perceptions of the philosopher and the "common sense" perceptions of the ordinary man; and if in his earlier years it was the sheer abstruseness of his philosophy which made him doubt the value of what he was doing, he now worried about what at the end of the day might be the difference between philosophy and common sense. But in the end he did find a humble use for philosophy. He writes, "'What we find out in philosophy is trivial; it does not teach us new facts, only science does that. But the proper synopsis of these trivialities is enormously difficult, and has immense importance. Philosophy is in fact the synopsis of trivialities.' In philosophy we are not, like the scientist, building a house. Nor are we even laying the foundations of a house. We are merely 'tidying up a room'". (Monk, pp.298/299.)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in


Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 27 Jul 2012 09:56:21 BDT
Last edited by the author on 29 Jul 2012 09:13:51 BDT
trini says:
I came across this review casually, without being engaged at the moment in the study of Wittgenstein. I ticked the box saying that I found the review helpful, but the reason I found it helpful is that it so clearly makes the point that Wittgenstein is a waste of time. In other words, the review is a good analysis of a useless philosopher. Philosophy must say something about the human condition, about who and what we are and how we are to live. I have written some comments on other books by or reviews about Wittgenstein, which I can't gather together now, but my main point remains. Statements like "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence", which, astonishingly, leave many famous philosophers in open-mouthed admiration, are simply a load of nonsense. Wittgenstein is said to have a sense of religion colouring all his work, but in fact he has nothing useful to say about religion. He considered, later in life, that his early work, which was supposed to have said, once and for all, all that there was to be said about philosophy, was quite wrong. And so on.

May I refer the kind reader to my amazon reviews of two books where I elaborate on my view of Wittgenstein: 'Theology after Wittgenstein', by Fergus Kerr; and 'A History of Modern Philosophy', by Anthony Kenny.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jul 2012 10:40:00 BDT
Last edited by the author on 27 Jul 2012 10:42:18 BDT
I certainly PREFER philosophy which says something about the human condition &c (hence the title of my book "Philosophy and Living") to philosophy which makes us think clearly about the meaning of the words we use; but that philosophy MUST do the former is, I think, a bit high-handed, and rules out huge areas of traditional philosophy - not only of recent times but going right back to parts of ancient Greek philosophy.And the later Wittgenstein, who helps us to understand "the language game", has, I think, made a valuable contribution to understanding aspects of ordinary life, and so contributed to furthering wisdom, the "sophia" bit of philosophy.

In reply to an earlier post on 27 Jul 2012 11:43:02 BDT
Last edited by the author on 28 Jul 2012 23:36:16 BDT
trini says:
Ralph Blumenau,
Thank you for replying to my comment. Of course I agree with you that the the tools of language and logic have a part to play in the total human thing. But I stick with my verdict that much of modern philosophy is simply outside of application to the human condition, or at best dead-ends before it becomes really useful or meaningful.

I have added a couple of references to my first comment, the one to which you replied. May I refer you to these reviews. In my review of Anthony Kenny's book on Modern Philosophy, I develop this, and include A J Ayer as another wasted philosophical existence. I realize fully that I am going against the whole thrust of modern philosophy, and I am not in the profession of philosophical studies. But I look at the world around me, and I see that modern philosophy (and its false practitioners who mix 'hard' science - cosmology and biology - with philosophy, like Hawking, Dawkins, and all the 'new atheists') is simply on a handcart to hell. See also my review of Simon Blackburn's short book, 'Truth - A Guide For the Perplexed'', which (the book, not my review) is another exposition of largely useless and perplexing modern philosophy.

Best wishes.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Dec 2013 22:48:43 GMT
Bubo says:
I agree with you trini. The Wittgenstein I've read gave me nothing, nothing at all. His life was admirable in many ways but his philosophy is too ahistorical and uprooted in my opinion.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details



Location: London United Kingdom

Top Reviewer Ranking: 233