Abstract
Cora Diamond is among the most influential Wittgenstein commentators
of recent years. One of her memorable contributions to
the literature is her colorful characterization of some of the Tractatus
interpretations she disagrees with – she calls them “chickening out”
interpretations. “Chickening out” interpretations are ones which
acknowledge Wittgenstein’s claim at 6.54 that his propositions are
nonsense, but still hold that there is a deep sense in which Wittgenstein’s
nonsense shows us something about reality, even if it does not
say anything. On Diamond’s view, the idea that there is something
shown about reality which cannot be expressed is itself part of what
we are meant to discard when we recognize the Tractarian propositions
as nonsense. Discarding this idea of showing is part of what
it means to “throw away the ladder after [we have] climbed up it”
(6.54). But 6.54, the passage in the Tractatus which serves as a focus for
Diamond’s austere reading of nonsense, also points out what may be
a problem for Diamond.Wittgenstein begins that passage by remarking
that his “propositions serve as elucidations”. Can Diamond’s
account of nonsense make room for the idea that Tractarian nonsense
is elucidatory? I will consider two aspects of
Diamond’s reading, and show how they are in tension. To begin, I
will discuss her general account of nonsense in more detail. Then, I
will look at her account of nonsense as elucidatory, focusing on the
concrete examples she uses to explain what it means for nonsense
to elucidate. I will argue that her general account of nonsense makes
her account of how nonsense elucidates problematic.