Wittgenstein

What does he Mean?

Philosophy of Mind

BRENT SILBY
Unlimited (UPT)
Wittgenstein

There is a misconception of the nature of the mind.

This is the view that we have an internal identity independent from
the world.

This is known as the cartesian model of the mind.

Recall Descartes’ argument. He doubted the existence of

everything, but could not doubt the existence of the mind

Wittgenstein has a different view. He believes that all aspects

of the mind are dependent upon language.
Wittgenstein

The cartesian view is that thoughts are possible without language.

But Wittgenstein does not agree.

Wittgenstein offered two accounts of human consciousness and

representation.

In this session we will focus on his later theory

Wittgenstein

In his early work, Wittgenstein theorized about the purpose of

language. He decided that the function of language was to
mirror reality.

He then refuted his early view and decided that the function of
language was not to mirror reality.

The meaning of words are not to be found by looking for their

association with objects in the world.

Instead, the meaning of words should be understood by the way

they are used in social context.
Wittgenstein

Wittgenstein is refuting the idea that meaning can be found in

the world or any mental act.

He does this by comparing thoughts to other types of experience.

For example: the experience of pain

Pain experiences have a specific beginning, a certain duration

and a precise end.

But, thoughts of meaning do not have these properties.

“Meaning”, “Understanding”, “Thinking a thought” are not

processes or acts of any kind.
Wittgenstein

To make his point, Wittgenstein asks us to point to a piece of

paper:

Point to a piece of paper. - And now point to its shape - now to its color - now
to its number (that sounds queer). - How did you do it? - You will say that you
‘meant’ a different thing each time you pointed. And if I ask how that is done,
you will say you concentrated your attention on the color, the shape, etc.
But I ask again: how is that done?

How do we mean different aspects of the paper each time we

point?

Our behavior is the same each time, so our meaning of shape

cannot be the act of pointing.
Wittgenstein

Even if we try to point at these aspects of the paper mentally,

We have the same problem.

We cannot point to the color or shape of the paper without using

language.

Pointing to aspects of a piece of paper requires some expression

of what we mean each time we point.

Meaning involves nothing more than using words.

Wittgenstein

If I tell someone that I am thinking of Mozart, and they ask

“who do I mean?” I respond by defining Mozart further.

This is done in language

My thinking of Mozart is not an internal act of representation.

Instead, my thought is a collection of background ideas that I

have gained solely through language.
Wittgenstein

For Wittgenstein, meaning and understanding can only happen

through language. He says:

I see a picture; it represents an old man walking up a steep path leaning on a stick.
- How? Might it not have looked just the same had he been sliding downhill in that
position?

He tells us that mental pictures (or pictures in general) do not

contain meaning. Even God could not look inside our minds and
see who or what we were speaking of.

There is no internal act of representation or meaning. The content

of a thought exists only in its expression, i.e. with language
Wittgenstein

Important point:
Words do not all gain their meaning in the same way.

A word gains its meaning through the way in which it is used and
taught to others.

For example: The word “pain”

We do not learn the word “pain” through introspection, because

if we did, everyone might mean something different by it.

The use of the word “pain” is linked to public events and

behavior. When a child hurts herself and cries, adults teach the
child words and sentences, thus teaching the child new pain
behavior.
Wittgenstein

The child learns the concept “pain” when she learns language.

Everything we think or intend gains its meaning from the use of

words.

Words gain their meaning from customs of the collective human

culture.
Wittgenstein

This is a critical point for Wittgenstein:

Language must be a public device, and there can be no private
languages that refer only to an individual’s private sensations.

Why?
Because private sensations cannot be categorized without
external criteria.

A person using their own private language would find themselves

introducing new rules whenever needed.

For Wittgenstein, such languages would be impossible to teach to

others, and therefore they would not be languages.
Wittgenstein

Wittgenstein has shown that it is difficult to maintain the common

view - that we can represent the world without language.

We cannot form beliefs or desires without language.

It is our language that shapes reality, not the other way around.

He is not saying that the world does not exist without language.
He is simply saying that we need language to represent and form
beliefs about the world.
Wittgenstein

But what about infants and non-human animals?

Does Wittgenstein show that they cannot think?

It would seem that Wittgenstein is saying that animals and infants

can’t feel pain, simply because they have no language.

It may be more accurate to suggest that the sensation exists,

but it can play no role on its own.

Language is required to conceptualize the pain and to give it a

role in conscious life.
Wittgenstein

An obvious question:
How do humans ever learn a language?

How do we learn the concept of words like “cup”? We must have

some way to recognize instances of objects. If not we could never
learn language.

Furthermore, how could our ancestors have developed language

without first having a way to conceptualize their environment?

Difficult question, because Wittgenstein thinks we need language

in order to conceptualize the world.

In the case of infants, it could be that as they learn language

their concept of the world becomes more complex.
Wittgenstein

We could tell a similar story about our ancestors. Their world

was very simplistic, until one day someone uttered something
that was recognized as meaning something.

It was probably accidental.

As language evolved, the human experience of the world changed

and became more elaborate.

We represent the world in more complex ways than our ancestors.

Our conscious life and view of the world has become rich, and
full of meaning.
Without language, the world would be empty and meaningless
Powerpoint by BRENT SILBY
www.def-logic.com

Produced at UPT
Christchurch, New Zealand
www.unlimited.school.nz