This volume sheds a new light on Philosophical Investigations, Ludwig Wittgenstein’s master opus, by taking a new approach to its first stretch, with special emphasis on its atypical opening. The methodological conviction that subtends the volume is that the highly unconventional form assumed by the book is internal to its content and crucial to its reconception of the relation between logic and language. This disconcerting form is dictated by the new modes of criticism deployed by Wittgenstein as he engages the (...) philosophical tradition in the new terms afforded by the revolutionary “method of language-games”. In the essays collected here, seven authors, including some of the most influential figures in the field, offer close and often unorthodox readings of pivotal passages from the beginning of the book. These readings are also shaped by the conviction that the Philosophical Investigations are hardly intelligible apart from an appreciation of the concerns that they inherit from Wittgenstein’s early work, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. The authors contend that we need to consider the continuities between the early and the later works if we are to disclose the true discontinuities between them. (shrink)

Dans la Lettre 6 de la correspondance d’Augustin, Nebridius pose à son ami deux questions sur l’imagination : la mémoire peut-elle exister sans la phantasia ? La phantasia ne tient-elle pas ses images d’elle-même plutôt que des sens ? Ces questions trouvent leur origine dans des textes de Plotin et de Porphyre, qui se référaient eux-mêmes au début du De memoria d’Aristote et à la célèbre thèse aristotélicienne selon laquelle l’âme ne pense pas sans image. Nebridius adopte l’idée qu’une image (...) sert nécessairement de « véhicule » ou de « miroir » à la pensée, que cette image soit celle d’un corps ou celle d’un mot. Augustin refuse quant à lui le principe d’une telle dépendance, chez l’homme, de l’intellect par rapport à l’imagination. Son originalité, au sein du néoplatonisme, tient à la radicalité avec laquelle il dénie tout rôle positif aux images dans la constitution de la connaissance.In Letter 6 of Augustine’s correspondence, Nebridius asks his friend two questions on imagination : Is memory able to exist without phantasia ? Does phantasia not get its images from itself rather than from the senses ? These questions arise from some texts by Plotinus and Porphyry, who referred to the beginning of Aristotle’s De memoria and to the famous Aristotelian claim that mind does not think without an image. Nebridius argues that thought has to use an image, either of a body or of a word, as a « vehicle » or as a « mirror ». Augustine, for his part, goes against the very principle of such a dependence of intellect on imagination in the case of man. The way he radically denies images any constructive role in the process of knowledge makes him original within Neoplatonism. (shrink)

Écrite entre 386 et 390 dans l’effervescence de la découverte du néoplatonisme, la correspondance avec Nebridius témoigne, bien avant les Confessions, des questions philosophiques et spirituelles qui passionnaient Augustin au moment de sa conversion à la philosophie et au christianisme. Written between 386 and 390 during the excitement of his discovery of Neoplatonism, Augustine’s correspondence with Nebridius bears witness, well before the Confessions, to the philosophical and spiritual questions that fascinated Augustine at the time of his conversion to philosophy and (...) Christianity. (shrink)