Private Objects, Physical Objects, and Ostension

In Stewart Candlish (ed.), Meaning, Understanding, and Practice. Oxford University Press (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Contains an examination of David Pears’ interpretation of the private language argument. Reasons are given to doubt Pears’ account both with regard to its content and as a reading of Wittgenstein. Remarks about Wittgenstein's philosophical enterprise are culled from the matter at hand.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,031

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The False Prison Volume Two.David Pears - 1988 - Oxford, GB: Clarendon Press.
Triangulation and the private language argument.Ahmed Arif - 2017 - Belgrade Philosophical Annual 30 (30):35-52.
Does the Tractatus Contain a Private Language Argument?William Child - 2013 - In Peter M. Sullivan & Michael D. Potter (eds.), Wittgenstein's Tractatus: history and interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 143-169.
A Defence of Wittgenstein's Private Language Argument.Kichang Nam - 1993 - Dissertation, Michigan State University
Wittgenstein.David Pears - 2002 - In Nicholas Bunnin & E. P. Tsui‐James (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. pp. 811–826.
Wittgenstein and the life of signs.Jim Hopkins - 2004 - In Max Kölbel & Bernhard Weiss (eds.), Wittgenstein's Lasting Significance. Routledge.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-10-25

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Barry Stroud
Last affiliation: University of California, Berkeley

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references