Wittgenstein's Tractatus and the epistemological work 'On Certainty' as well as the Blue and Brown books are interesting. Russell got Wittgenstein a PhD and position at Cambridge where he worked on linguistic philosophy. I like Sartre's work quite a bit more, and that of W.V.O. Quine and P.F. Strawson too concerning epistemology. In the tradition of linguistic philosophy Wittgenstein definitely has a place, yet it moves on and the work of Saul Kripke for example, with his most famous work; 'Naming and Necessity' is original work. Harvard wouldn't give him a PhD because there was no one competent to evaluate his work at the time- he was that original. Quine's work is similar though in some respects and Kripke was familiar with Quine's work in the discussion and realism vs nominalism. Quine and Strawson are quite good for bringing epistemological insights forward from empiricism in the field of the philosophy of logic. The technical approach reminds me a lot of Kant's try at epistemology with the Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (a condensed version of the Critique of Pure Reason).
This is a different philosophical line of a few philosophical writers that wrote within a century of one another...
I took a course on Kierkegaard and Socratic Irony that was quite good after I had read Stages in Life's Way, Fear and Trembling, The Sickness Unto Death, etc. I have read Nietzsche's collected works and didn't find anything in them even vaguely like Sartre's works- not even his aphorisms, and Camus' works like The Plague, and The Stranger. I.M.O. they don't begin to approach even remotely the technical rigor of Sartre as he continued French rationalism. Being and Nothingness and The Critique of Dialectical Reason are nothing like the works of the above authors you have mentioned. Camus' The Plague is a good novel, yet Camus was a fiction writer perhaps comparable to Dostoyevsky more appropriately than Sartre who was a professional philosopher as well as a fine writer of novels, plays and short stories- he won a Nobel prize in Literature for that, yet turned that down like so many others before him- l.o.l.
This is a different philosophical line of a few philosophical writers that wrote within a century of one another...
I took a course on Kierkegaard and Socratic Irony that was quite good after I had read Stages in Life's Way, Fear and Trembling, The Sickness Unto Death, etc. I have read Nietzsche's collected works and didn't find anything in them even vaguely like Sartre's works- not even his aphorisms, and Camus' works like The Plague, and The Stranger. I.M.O. they don't begin to approach even remotely the technical rigor of Sartre as he continued French rationalism. Being and Nothingness and The Critique of Dialectical Reason are nothing like the works of the above authors you have mentioned. Camus' The Plague is a good novel, yet Camus was a fiction writer perhaps comparable to Dostoyevsky more appropriately than Sartre who was a professional philosopher as well as a fine writer of novels, plays and short stories- he won a Nobel prize in Literature for that, yet turned that down like so many others before him- l.o.l.
No comments:
Post a Comment