Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:22:47.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Language and the Society of Others

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 January 2009

Extract

The solitary language user is again stalking the critical fields of Europe (and America, one should add). This pre-social individual, abstracted from all social and historical context, has been seemingly revived after what many of us saw as a death-blow dealt by Wittgenstein in his analysis of the notion of following a rule, and his related discussions bringing out the impossibilities of a ‘private’ language—what has come to be known as Wittgenstein's ‘private language argument’. Just what a ‘private language’ is has become the issue. Did Wittgenstein show that language-use and rule-following essentially and necessarily involved others, and were therefore necessarily social in character (thus showing that to be human and to be rational was necessarily to be social—as Aristotle had it)? Or did his arguments bear only against the notion of a language which was essentially and necessarily private, one which could not in principle be taught to another?

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Baker, G. P. & Hacker, P. M. S., Rules, Grammar and Necessity (Oxford: Blackwell, 1985), ch. 4.Google Scholar

2 McGinn, Colin, Wittgenstein on Meaning (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), ch. 4.Google Scholar

3 I was returned to the ground re-explored in this paper by discussions I had with Norman Malcolm in the last years of his life. I would like to offer it to the memory of that good philosopher and fine man.