|
|
Ludwig Wittgenstein の売れ筋最新ランキング ［2009年01月08日 15時20分］ |
|
76ページ中 8ページ目を表示しています
（71～80件）
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein: Half-Truths and One-And-A-Half-Truths (Jaakko Hintikka Selected Papers, V. 1)
Jaakko Hintikka
￥ 22,464（税込）
￥ 28,846（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
|
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein. Leben. Werk. Wirkung
Joachim Schulte
￥ 967（税込）
￥ 1,191（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
|
|
|
| 
おすすめ度
| Ludwig Wittgenstein (Critical Lives)
Edward Kanterian
￥ 1,526（税込）
￥ 1,651（税込）
通常10～12日以内に発送
ジャンル内ランキング：190,681位
カスタマーレビュー数：1
【くちコミ情報】
Excellent but flawed look at our greatest psychologist
Ludwig Wittgenstein y Edwa d Kante ian Reaktion P ess (2007) Suppose Einstein was a suicidal homosexual ecluse with a difficult pe sonality who pu lished only one ea ly ve sion of his ideas that we e totally mistaken ut ecame wo ld famous; completely changed his ideas ut fo the next 30 yea s pu lished nothing mo e, and knowledge of his new wo k in mostly ga led fo m diffused slowly f om occasional lectu es and students notes; that he died in 1951 leaving ehind ove 20,000 pages of mostly handw itten sc i lings in Ge man, each a few sentences o pa ag aphs with, often, no clea elationship to what came efo e o afte ; that these we e cut and pasted f om othe note ooks w itten yea s ea lie with sc i lings in the ma gins, unde linings and c ossed out wo ds so that many sentences have multiple va iants; that his lite a y executives cut this indigesti le mass into pieces, leaving out what they wished and st uggling with the monst ous task of captu ing the co ect meaning of sentences which we e conveying utte ly novel views of how the unive se wo ks and that they then pu lished this mate ial with agonizing slowness (not finished afte half a centu y) with p efaces that contained no eal explanation of what it was a out; that he ecame as much noto ious as famous due to many statements that all p evious physics was a mistake and even nonsense; and that vi tually no ody unde stood his wo k, in spite of hund eds of ooks and tens of thousands of pape s discussing it; that many physicists knew only his ea ly wo k in which he had made a definitive summation of the view that we must unde stand the wo ld in te ms of the ethe , calo ic, ast ology , phlogiston and alchemy; that he was then vi tually fo gotten and that most ooks and a ticles on the natu e of the wo ld and the dive se topics of mode n physics had only passing and usually e oneous efe ences to him and that many omitted him enti ely; that to this day, half a centu y afte his death, the e we e only a handful of people who eally g asped the monumental consequences of what he had done. This, I claim, is p ecisely the situation with Wittgenstein. Ove half a centu y afte his death and afte decades of elative neglect (conside ing he is viewed y some as the g eatest natu al psychologist of all time) Wittgenstein is again att acting conside a le attention. Though the e a e hund eds of ooks dealing wholely o in la ge pa t with him, few have eally g asped his ema ka le advances in unde standing ehavio , so this f esh look is most welcome. Ove all, it is fi st ate with accu ate, sensitive and penet ating accounts of his life and thought in oughly ch onological o de , ut, inevita ly (ie, like eve yone else) it fails, in my view, to place his wo k in p ope context and gets some c itical points w ong. It is not made clea that philosophy is a mchai psychology and that W was a pionee in what late ecame cognitive o evolutiona y psychology. One would not su mise f om this ook that he laid out the foundations of the mode n concept of intentionality ( oughly, pe sonality o highe o de thought) which has een fu the advanced y many (most notea ly in philosophy y John Sea le in The Const uction of Social Reality and Rationality in Action). The e is no clea explanation of how W defined the class of potential actions, which he called dispositions o inclinations, (now often called p opositional attitudes), diffe entiating them f om pe ceptions, memo ies and actions and showing how they lack t uth value. He notes that W spent much of his time discussing the foundations of mathematics ut fails to p ovide any explanation as to how this elates to his wo k on language and logic. In fact, as W came to ealize, they a e all names fo g oups of functions of ou innate psychology with many diffe ences and none a e dependent on the othe s. It is not eally made clea that all ou ehavio depends on the unquestiona le axioms of ou evolved psychology and thus diffe s totally f om the testa le empi ical facts which they ena le us to discove . It is not explained that Ws f equent efe ences to g amma and to language games efe to ou innate psychology. All these failings a e the no m in ehavio al studies. Kante ian notes (p41) that in Ws fi st talk on philosophy, given in 1912 at the age of 23, he is epo ted to have said that philosophy is the totality of all p opositions that a e taken as unp ova le and asic in science. If one unde stands that philosophy is o se vational psychology, and that p opositions a e sentences which depend fo intelligi ility (t uth) on the innate axioms of ou psychology, it appea s that W unde stood the asic p o lem of philosophy ( ehavio ) and its answe ight f om the eginninga feat few have accomplished to this day. He again made this c ystal clea in a lette to Russell quoted y Kante ian (p86) in which he stated that the point of TLP : is the theo y of what can e exp essed y p opositions ie. y language-(and which comes to the same, what can e thought) and what cannot e exp essed y p opositions, ut only shown (gezeigt) which, I elieve, is the ca dinal p o lem of philosophy. Note also Ws identification of thought with language and his ejection of the idea that the e is, etween language and thought, anothe entity such as the language of thought, a point which he discussed di ectly and indi ectly fo the next 30 yea s ut which still edevils ehavio al lite atu e nea ly a centu y late --anothe sad consequence of the o livion to one of ou g eatest teache s. Kante ian desc i es the famous distinction in Ws T actatus etween what can e said and what can only e shown ut does not explain that one can unde stand this in te ms of Ws late denotation of the diffe ence etween ou axiomatic innate psychology, which su mits to no test (eg, this is my hand, I am eading this page etc), and the factual o empi ical applications of this evolved axiomatic system (ie, ou intentionality). Pe haps one should not fault Kante ian, since, to my knowledge, no ody else has noticed what I ega d as this asic and essential inte p etation of Ws TLP eithe though a few have noticed it in his late wo k. It is essential to unde stand this distinction ecause any desc iption (following Ws f equent injunction that we cannot EXPLAIN ut only DESCRIBE ou psychology) of animal ehavio must do so in te ms of evolution fo the same easons we must desc i e the genetics, physiology, anatomy and function of the hea t in evolutiona y te ms. The alte native lank slate view that hea t functioning is a matte of ones envi onment is just as p eposte ous fo the ain. He does a good jo (eg, pg 170-171) of desc i ing (as have othe s, nota ly Hacke ) Ws t ansition f om the confusions of TLP to the cla ity of his late wo k, ut (again in my view following unive sal p actice) does not eally g asp that Ws ideas of the atomic facts and c ystalline logic that fo med the foundations of his TLP wo ld view evolved into the notions of an innate axiomatic psychology that he explicated fo the last 20 yea s of his life. He also notes (p80) that y discove ing the innateness of depth g amma (ie, ou inhe ited psychology that makes language (thought) possi le), W anticipated Chomsky and othe s y decades. I noticed this some 40 yea s ago ut I have neve seen anyone else point it out, so its hats off to Kante ian! With his penet ating unde standing of ou psychology, W was also p escient a out la ge issues such as the desi ea ility of p og ess. It isnt a su d... to elieve that the age of science and technology is the eginning of the end fo humanity; that the idea of g eat p og ess is a delusion, along with the idea that the t uth will ultimately y known; that the e is nothing good o desi ea le a out scientific knowledge and that mankind, in seeking it, is falling into a t ap. It is y no means o vious that this in not how things a e. ) (Kante ian p114 f om Ws Cultu e and Value). Kante ian quotes, without I think fully unde standing its implications (again like eve yone else so fa as I know), anothe ve y fundamental discove y y Wou natu al tendency to su sume all uses of a wo d o sentence unde a single meaning athe than ecognizing that eg, space is a complex family of uses o concepts (language games as W liked to call them) with quite diffe ent applications (meanings) in ou life (ou intentional psychology). He notes that W desc i ed thinking and othe dispositions o inclinations (Ws te ms)-- (ie, judging, feeling, emem e ing, elieving etc)-- as ehavio s and not as mental activities ut I dont see that he eally makes it clea that anothe pionee ing discove y of Ws was that dispositions desc i e pu lic actions and cannot e mental phenomena fo the same eason that he so famously ejected the possi ility of a p ivate language. The p o a le evolutiona y explanation fo a oute to such usage of dispostion wo ds seems to me to e that seve al hund ed thousand yea s ago (give o take) when we evolved the a ility to vocalize events, o jects o actions (ie, when an animal as agent was involved), sentences fi st su stituted fo them (get spea , hunt dee ) and only late ecame usa le in a dispositional o displaced manne (I want you to get the spea , I think we will hunt dee soon). Again, to my knowledge, W was the fi st to point this out in any detail with such examples as how pain language functions (see p 182). Kante ian desc i es (p174) how W (so famously and noto iously ) felt he had put an end to philosophy as it was unde stood and how most philosophe s eject this view (o mo e commonly simply igno e it if they a e awa e of it at all), ut his comments that this na ows the ange of what we can know y a st act thought and that metaphysical questions make no sense, seem to me to completely miss the point. I think W just called ou attention to the fact that knowing is anothe set of games o psychological functions which we can only accept as they a e. Much (we might say ALL) of Ws wo k can e seen as desc i ing how knowing wo ks and his last w itings pu lished as On Ce tainty ega ded as the c owning achievement of his life (and of 20th centu y philosophy psychology). Metaphysical questions have no t action ecause questioning the axioms of ou psychology lacks a use in ou life (this is not eally my hand, may e 2+2=4 is not eally t ue, pe haps you a e not eading this page, etc). A st act thought (games, music, math, lite atu e, science) is limitless ut enti ely dependent on the axioms. Kante ian is one of the a e pe sons who gets it co ect (p185) that W ejects a language of thought fo the same eason he ejects p ivate languages and dispositions such as thinking, elieving etc as mental p ocesses(p 180-183); namely that this would make it possi le to make systematic mistakes in ou t anslations of thoughts to actions (eg, thinking I want that apple to saying I want that apple) which is a su d. A t anslation could always e w ong and what test could tell us? We lack the c ite ia fo co ectness. We would then need some test fo showing what we eally thought! I might say I want the apple o I dont want the apple and what connects that to my thoughteven fo me? The wo ds a e my thoughts (app oximately) which a e desc iptions of acts. Kante ian also mentions that, in spite of the fact that a la ge pe centage of Ws w iting conce ned the philosophy (ie psychology) of mathematics, ve y little attention is paid to his wo k y most of those w iting on the foundations of math ove the last 50 yea s. Unfo tunately he fails to tell us why. One eason is the nea ly unive sal failu e to unde stand what W has done as a esult of his o iginality, style, failu e to pu lish and p ematu e death. Anothe is that it took so long to p ope ly gathe , t anslate and edit the 20,000 some pages of his nachlass that seve al gene ations have g own up without access to the full ody of his wo k. Even to this day some of the Ge man text emains unt anslated and one of his most famous and la gest wo ksThe Big Typesc iptwas only t anslated and pu lished in 2005. In addition, many who we e ega ded as expe ts on the su ject of math and logic (eg Dummett, K eisel, Chiha a, Godel) totally failed to unde stand him and much of the w iting y othe s on the foundations of math is not a out its psychological foundations at all (of which they a e gene ally o livious) ut a out the details of how math is done. The few who have made p og ess in unde standing his mathematical comments have een la gely igno ed (eg, Gefwe t, Shanke ) o have pu lished so ecently that thei wo k has not had time to diffuse (eg, Rodych, Floyd). Those inte ested will find fu the comments and efe ences in my othe eviews. I claim that Ws wo k on this is continuous with the est of his co pus and ove all, the most o iginal and stimulating eve done. He epeatedly and co ectly notes (eg, p176) that the co e of Ws wo k is the natu e of language ut (again the unive sal failing) does not make it clea that language is fo humans (as opposed to animals) almost coextensive with thought (pu lic ehavio as W insisted) and thus with ou evolved psychology. Like most people, philosophe s o not, Kante ian has not followed W and taken the final step towa ds unde standing and desc i ing ehavio f om an evolutiona y standpoint, the only viewpoint that makes sense of it, o indeed of anything.
|
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein: Wiener Ausgabe : Register Zu Den Banden 1-5 (Ludwig Wittgenstein, Wiener Ausgabe)
Herausgegeben Von Michael Nedo
（編集）
￥ 10,726（税込）
￥ 14,267（税込）
間もなく入荷します。ご注文はお早めに。商品はご注文いただいた順番にお届けします。
|
|
|
| 
| Wie Ludwig Wittgenstein Karl Popper mit dem Feuerhaken drohte. Eine Ermittlung.
David J. Edmonds
John A. Eidinow
Suzanne Annette Gangloff
（翻訳）
Angela Schumitz
（翻訳）
Fee Engemann
（翻訳）
￥ 1,335（税込）
￥ 1,623（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
|
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Wilhelm Vossenkuhl
￥ 2,068（税込）
￥ 2,427（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
ジャンル内ランキング：1,052,022位
|
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein: Philosophy and Language (Wittgenstein Studies)
Alice Ambrose
（編集）
Morris Lazerowitz
（編集）
￥ 2,362（税込）
￥ 4,069（税込）
間もなく入荷します。ご注文はお早めに。商品はご注文いただいた順番にお届けします。
ジャンル内ランキング：715,323位
|
|
|
| 
| Ludwig Wittgenstein und Peter Janich ueber den Gebrauch des Zeitbegriffs
Nadine Hagemus
￥ 1,711（税込）
￥ 2,054（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
|
|
|
| 
| Wittgenstein and the Philosophy of Information: Proceedings of the 30th International Ludwig Wittgenstein-symposium in Kirchberg, 2007
Herbert Hrachovec
（編集）
Alois Pichler
（編集）
￥ 10,029（税込）
￥ 9,527（税込）
近日発売 予約可
|
|
|
| 
| Doxology and Theology: An Investigation of the Apostles' Creed in Light of Ludwig Wittgenstein (American University Studies VII: Theology and Religion)
Paul Galbreath
￥ 3,285（税込）
￥ 3,928（税込）
通常1～3週間以内に発送
|
|
|
|
76ページ中 8ページ目を表示しています
（71～80件）
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
|
|
このサイトはAmazon Web サービスを利用して作成しています。
|
