The origins Of Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Remarks: On Ts 208 And Ts 209

M. Engelmann
{"title":"The origins Of Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Remarks: On Ts 208 And Ts 209","authors":"M. Engelmann","doi":"10.5216/phi.v25i1.62274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to Rush Rhees, Wittgenstein composed TS 209 (Philosophical Remarks) and handed it in to Russell in order to renew a grant from the Cambridge Council Cambridge in April-May 1930. Pichler (1994, 2009) and Rothhaupt (2010) challenged Rhees’ hypothesis, and claimed that Wittgenstein handed in TS 208 to Russell, and not TS 209. Against their view, I argue that Rhees’ hypothesis best explains the major motive for the composition of Philosophical Remarks, and that it best explains what Wittgenstein handed in to Russell. While I give six reasons in favor of Rhees, I also try to explain how Russell, Moore, Littlewood, Schlick, and Waismann are linked with the composition of TS 208 and TS 209.","PeriodicalId":30368,"journal":{"name":"Philosophos Revista de Filosofia","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophos Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5216/phi.v25i1.62274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to Rush Rhees, Wittgenstein composed TS 209 (Philosophical Remarks) and handed it in to Russell in order to renew a grant from the Cambridge Council Cambridge in April-May 1930. Pichler (1994, 2009) and Rothhaupt (2010) challenged Rhees’ hypothesis, and claimed that Wittgenstein handed in TS 208 to Russell, and not TS 209. Against their view, I argue that Rhees’ hypothesis best explains the major motive for the composition of Philosophical Remarks, and that it best explains what Wittgenstein handed in to Russell. While I give six reasons in favor of Rhees, I also try to explain how Russell, Moore, Littlewood, Schlick, and Waismann are linked with the composition of TS 208 and TS 209.
维特根斯坦哲学评论的起源:论第208篇和第209篇
根据拉什·里斯的说法,维特根斯坦写了TS 209(哲学评论),并把它交给了罗素,以便在1930年4月至5月期间续签剑桥委员会的资助。Pichler(1994,2009)和Rothhaupt(2010)对Rhees的假设提出了质疑,并声称维特根斯坦将TS 208交给了罗素,而不是TS 209。与他们的观点相反,我认为李的假设最好地解释了《哲学评论》写作的主要动机,也最好地解释了维特根斯坦交给罗素的东西。虽然我给出了支持Rhees的六个理由,但我也试图解释罗素、摩尔、利特伍德、施里克和魏斯曼是如何与TS 208和TS 209的组成联系在一起的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信