Wittgenstein's work is only apparently simple, in that he avoids jargon and does not construct elaborate theories which require the supporting authority of previous thinkers. That doesn't mean that he was always right, either; just that the spirit of what he was trying to do can easily be lost if you don't read him in quite a lot of depth. This shoddy collection of supposed aphorisms treats Wittgenstein as if he were a Rochefoucauld or a Lichtenberg, or even Nietzsche at his least systematic - the kind of thinker whose work can be absorbed by reading a few nuggets, and even then, perhaps only Rochefoucauld was that kind of thinker, in that Lichtenberg was more ambiguous and Nietzsche's aphoristic works are part of all his overall attack on systematism. Wittgenstein drew on Lichtenberg and Nietzsche but his slow and patient unpicking of philosophical preconceptions is not done any justice by this kind of compilation. His work changed its entire character over time, and that needs to be respected.