Rating: 
Summary: Beyond the Valley of the Ultra-twits
Review: Somebody once said that if you don't like Italian food, then you shouldn't be a reviewer of pizza joints. But that is to say that it is not "fair", when reviewing something that is worthless on its face, to point this out.
The main problem with this biography is that it is about Wittgenstein and his cronies, most of whom were British academic philosophers. These people are all insufferable twits. And the self-inflicted tragedy of Wittgenstein's life is that he succumbed to the quicksand of academic twithood himself, though he had enough sense to realize that this was in fact happening and to loathe himself accordingly. For example, after a golden afternoon spent watching somebody's son competing in a rowing race, Wittgenstein informed the posse he was hanging with that the "manner in which we have spent the afternoon is so vile, we ought not to go on living." But go on living he did. And so then, ten years later you are supposed to be thrilling to scenes like the quaint bucolic gothic romance wherein Wittgenstein makes extensive indirect inquiries about whether or not, if he were to return to England, Keynes would be willing to commit to blocking out some serious time "in order to get to know him again" Because, as Wittgenstein says, he's changed so much in these last ten years or so that it would take quite a long gander on Keynes' part to really take him in. Yeah, he's changed a boatload. He still can't get it through his head that the substance of life is not to be found in other people - especially academic blitherers like this crew. What is wrong with academic philosophy? What is wrong with it is that it is an oxymoronic phrase. What is philosophy? The application of mental effort to the problems of the world. What is problematic in the world? Suffering. Academic philosophy is deficient in that it does not address itself to the basic problem of suffering. That is to say the basic problem of philosophy is that we are perplexed. Ceasing to be perplexed is the proper aim of philosophy. Academic philosophers treat philosophy as though it were an armchair activity. This is exactly like treating war as if it were an armchair activity. As John F. Kennedy said, the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena. Philosophy that does not address itself to the problem of suffering is like war theorizing that does not put you in a position to achieve military victory over enemies. What do we mean by "suffering"? Well, like for example spending an afternoon with a bunch of jerks watching a boat race and then wanting to blow your head off. I'd say that's a pretty good example of suffering. So, what, you're supposed to go home from that session and then draw some duck/rabbits? That's just not going to cut it.
Rating:
Summary: Beyond the Valley of the Ultra-twits
Review: Somebody once said that if you don't like Italian food, then you shouldn't be a reviewer of pizza joints. But that is to say that it is not "fair", when reviewing something that is worthless on its face, to point this out.
The main problem with this biography is that it is about Wittgenstein and his cronies, most of whom were British academic philosophers. These people are all insufferable twits. And the self-inflicted tragedy of Wittgenstein's life is that he succumbed to the quicksand of academic twithood himself, though he had enough sense to realize that this was in fact happening and to loathe himself accordingly. For example, after a golden afternoon spent watching somebody's son competing in a rowing race, Wittgenstein informed the posse he was hanging with that the "manner in which we have spent the afternoon is so vile, we ought not to go on living." But go on living he did. And so then, ten years later you are supposed to be thrilling to scenes like the quaint bucolic gothic romance wherein Wittgenstein makes extensive indirect inquiries about whether or not, if he were to return to England, Keynes would be willing to commit to blocking out some serious time "in order to get to know him again" Because, as Wittgenstein says, he's changed so much in these last ten years or so that it would take quite a long gander on Keynes' part to really take him in. Yeah, he's changed a boatload. He still can't get it through his head that the substance of life is not to be found in other people - especially academic blitherers like this crew. What is wrong with academic philosophy? What is wrong with it is that it is an oxymoronic phrase. What is philosophy? The application of mental effort to the problems of the world. What is problematic in the world? Suffering. Academic philosophy is deficient in that it does not address itself to the basic problem of suffering. That is to say the basic problem of philosophy is that we are perplexed. Ceasing to be perplexed is the proper aim of philosophy. Academic philosophers treat philosophy as though it were an armchair activity. This is exactly like treating war as if it were an armchair activity. As John F. Kennedy said, the credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena. Philosophy that does not address itself to the problem of suffering is like war theorizing that does not put you in a position to achieve military victory over enemies. What do we mean by "suffering"? Well, like for example spending an afternoon with a bunch of jerks watching a boat race and then wanting to blow your head off. I'd say that's a pretty good example of suffering. So, what, you're supposed to go home from that session and then draw some duck/rabbits? That's just not going to cut it.
Rating: 
Summary: A good road map of fundamentals of philosophical thinking
Review: The Duty of Genius is a book about a tormented man who tried to change the world he lived in, the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, a philosopher's philosopher. His goals were breath taking: nothing less than to discuss the philosophical basis of the Mathematics, something of the utmost importance for men like Bertrand Russel, G.E.Moore and Norton Whitehead, the most important philosophers at the time. To all of them, and to some important Austrian and German philosophers in Wittgestein's circle, the work of Wittgestein was to be known as a watershed event. Almost at the same time, still a youth, he was the pupil and master of Bertrand Russell, to whom he later exerted an almost opressive power, even of determining what was right or wrong in Russell's train of tought. Whenever it happened, Russell got depressive almost in a childlike manner, discarding what he did in order to attain a more solid ground. To Russell, Wittgenstein was the heir presumptive of his thinking, due to both his genius and to the vigour Wittgenstein had as a brilliant youth. But Ludwig Wittgenstein himself was a troubled soul, deeply tormented by the ghosts of three elder brothers who comitted suicide and who did not resist the pressure exerted on them by his authoritarian father, who wanted his sons to pursue a business career in the family company. Ludwig was of Jewish ascendancy but, with all his family, had to hide/disguise his Jewish background in order to be accepted in the Austrian aristocratic society where his father prospered as a businessman; Ludwig later gave up all his immense wealth to family and friends, trying to dismiss himself with all associations of his noble birth, working many years as a teacher in a fundamental school in rural Austria and later trying to work as a simple workman in Soviet Union; he enlisted voluntarily and fought for his country in the First World War, getting many medals for heroism in the battlefield, lived many months secluded from the world in a rural cabin in Norway, and was reclusive to the point of depression, etc..Concerning money, he was determined not to beg anyone's money (Keynes included) in order to pursue his philosophical objectives. His bisexuality was hidden, due to his propensity to hide his emotions from others.
Despite all the peculiarities of Ludwig's life, the book does not attain the same level of the other biographies Mr.Ray Monk made on Bertrand Russel, but this maybe due to the fact that Bertrand Russell was a much more complex man, with many wives, lovers, children and friends, in my opinion, a much more popular and media attractive subject than Wittgenstein. Despite everything, the book is a pretty much good one, and guides the reader trough the intricacies of philosophical thinking.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent biography in general; falls short of definitive.
Review: The greatest strength of Monk's work is that is stays away from a discussion of Wittgenstein's philosophy--the casual reader is not burdened by Wittgenstein's incredibly difficult writings. Which is not to say that Monk's book is not instructive for the student of Wittgenstein. Quite to the contrary, the analysis of his life and times provides one of the best avenues into understanding his work. Ray Monk fleshes out not only Wittgenstein's life, but the society (from Vienna to Cambridge) in which he lived. The reader is left to make his or her own connections to Wittgenstein's philosophy, which Wittgenstein probably would have liked.
In regards to completeness, there is still a great deal we do not know about Wittgenstein's life; Ray Monk has provided as much information as is perhaps available. This does mean, however, that The Duty of Genius does not quite constitute The Definitive Biography
Rating:
Summary: Wittgenstein, the man
Review: This book is enlightening, not only for a history of the development of Wittgenstein's thought, but also for its account of his emotional states and mystical experiences. It is not generally appreciated that Wittgenstein was an intensley spiritual man who struggled with his own ethical dilemmas about how life should be led. I ended up with a great feeling of love for this truly unique man. Well worth a read.
Rating:
Summary: Spiritual Guide
Review: What impresses me most about Monk's biography is how Wittgenstein emerges from the text as a very complicated, demanding yet inspirational spiritual guide (for a reader so inclined). Monk, overall, is successful in disappearing from the page and allowing Witt. to stand alone. The weakest points are usually Monk's interpretations, commentaries, etc. which seem to only serve the purpose of telling the reader that this particular anti-semitic remark is unfortunate, or that this particular letter from B. Russell is gracious, etc., as if the reader can't figure it out for him or herself. But, the extensive quotations are illuminating and W. himself is captivating. Some things just skimmed across--Blake was W.'s favorite British poet, he didn't appreciate Shakespeare--piqued my curiosity and I do wish they were shown more in-depth. Finally, W.'s last days are rendered without excess sentimentality and, therefore, are rendered beautifully.
Rating:
Summary: Mildly lifelike
Review: Wittgenstein is the kind of philosopher who keeps thinking up new approaches, publishing little during his life, but widely admired by those who could consider him a teacher. Having been raised in a cultured family in Vienna, he had been formally trained in the arts, such as music, so well that "When he played, he was not expressing himself, his own primordial life, but the thoughts, the life, of others." (p. 240). Ray Monk has tracked down a lot of information to produce this book. People who have more interest in philosophy itself might learn more about what was considered important during his life by reading the portions of THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES, A GLOBAL THEORY OF INTELLECTUAL CHANGE by Randall Collins. Philosophers don't naturally find "The Duty of Genius," the subtitle of Ray Monk's biography, LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN, as much as they compete for attention in the creative spheres of their own time. Due to the unique shift in the lives of many Viennese university professors to England and America at a troubled time in the twentieth century, many readers around the world are in a position to appreciate Wittgenstein's ideas. In Chapter 13 of THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES, subtitled, "Boundaries as Philosophical Puzzles," sections have the titles, "The Social Invention of Higher Mathematics" (pp. 697-709), "The Logicism of Russell and Wittgenstein" (pp. 709-717), "The Vienna Circle as a Nexus of Struggles" (pp. 717-730), "The Ordinary Language Reaction against Logical Formalism" (pp. 731-734), and "Wittgenstein's Tortured Path" (pp. 734-737). Wittgenstein was able to matter to many of the thinkers who found a place in that chapter, and Randall Collins explains the places in the philosophical world. Ray Monk's biography, LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN, might seem much more disappointing because the author never seems to have figured out any ultimate questions. Familiar names appear in this book, but the immediacy of life is often lacking. A meeting between Wittgenstein and Moritz Schlick, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Vienna, is described as not actually occurring until "Gretl succeeded where Schlick himself had, on more than one occasion over a number of years, failed." (p. 241). People with lives that are constantly changing might appreciate how Schlick read TRACTATUS in 1922, wrote to Wittgenstein at Puchberg in 1924, received a reply from Wittgenstein from Otterthal, made a trip to Otterthal in April, 1926 with a few students, but "On arriving in Otterthal the pilgrims were deeply disappointed to be told that Wittgenstein had resigned his post and had left teaching." (p. 242). Finally in February 1927, Gretl invited Schlick to dinner to meet Wittgenstein, after which, "The next day Wittgenstein told Engelmann: `Each of us thought the other must be mad.' Soon after this, Wittgenstein and Schlick began to meet regularly for discussions." (p. 242). By the summer of 1927 Wittgenstein was drawn into meetings on Monday evenings which included Rudolf Carnap, who reported, "His point of view and his attitude toward people and problems, even theoretical problems, were much more similar to those of a creative artist than to those of a scientist; one might almost say, similar to those of a religious prophet or a seer." (p. 244). Later in the book, Wittgenstein is identified with opposition to science in a form which had invaded philosophy. "You might think Aesthetics is a science telling us what's beautiful - almost too ridiculous for words." (p. 405). He told audiences that he was disgusted with "the worship of science, and he therefore spent some time in these lectures execrating what he considered to be powerful and damaging forms of evangelism for this worship." (p. 404). If that makes more sense to you than anything you previously knew about philosophy, this book might be a good way to learn about philosophy. "Wittgenstein quotes two kinds of explanation from the work of Freud, which illustrate, respectively, the kind of reductive account that he thought should be avoided at all costs, and the other `style of thinking' that he was trying to promote." (p. 405). Wittgenstein is given credit for appreciating Freud's JOKES AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THE UNCONSCIOUS, in which "One of Heine's characters, a humble lottery-agent, in boasting about his relations with Baron Rothschild, remarks: `He treated me quite as his equal - quite familionairely'. The reason this makes us laugh, Freud claims, . . . there is actually something rather unpleasant about being treated with a rich man's condescension." (pp. 406-407). Wittgenstein's aesthetic analysis of such explanations leads into a way of appreciating art. "But the important thing was that I read the poems entirely differently, more intensely, and said to others: `Look! This is how they should be read.' " (p. 407). In the picture section, numbers 44 & 45 show a post card, with a picture of "The Pilgrim of Peace/ Bravo ! Mr. Chamberlain" that he didn't send to anyone. There is no address or postage stamp, but he wrote the message, "In case you want an Emetic, there it is." Signed LudW, it might be considered typical of what was considered humor on college campuses, but most of this book is on a higher level.
Rating:
Summary: Mildly lifelike
Review: Wittgenstein is the kind of philosopher who keeps thinking up new approaches, publishing little during his life, but widely admired by those who could consider him a teacher. Having been raised in a cultured family in Vienna, he had been formally trained in the arts, such as music, so well that "When he played, he was not expressing himself, his own primordial life, but the thoughts, the life, of others." (p. 240). Ray Monk has tracked down a lot of information to produce this book. People who have more interest in philosophy itself might learn more about what was considered important during his life by reading the portions of THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES, A GLOBAL THEORY OF INTELLECTUAL CHANGE by Randall Collins. Philosophers don't naturally find "The Duty of Genius," the subtitle of Ray Monk's biography, LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN, as much as they compete for attention in the creative spheres of their own time. Due to the unique shift in the lives of many Viennese university professors to England and America at a troubled time in the twentieth century, many readers around the world are in a position to appreciate Wittgenstein's ideas. In Chapter 13 of THE SOCIOLOGY OF PHILOSOPHIES, subtitled, "Boundaries as Philosophical Puzzles," sections have the titles, "The Social Invention of Higher Mathematics" (pp. 697-709), "The Logicism of Russell and Wittgenstein" (pp. 709-717), "The Vienna Circle as a Nexus of Struggles" (pp. 717-730), "The Ordinary Language Reaction against Logical Formalism" (pp. 731-734), and "Wittgenstein's Tortured Path" (pp. 734-737). Wittgenstein was able to matter to many of the thinkers who found a place in that chapter, and Randall Collins explains the places in the philosophical world. Ray Monk's biography, LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN, might seem much more disappointing because the author never seems to have figured out any ultimate questions. Familiar names appear in this book, but the immediacy of life is often lacking. A meeting between Wittgenstein and Moritz Schlick, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Vienna, is described as not actually occurring until "Gretl succeeded where Schlick himself had, on more than one occasion over a number of years, failed." (p. 241). People with lives that are constantly changing might appreciate how Schlick read TRACTATUS in 1922, wrote to Wittgenstein at Puchberg in 1924, received a reply from Wittgenstein from Otterthal, made a trip to Otterthal in April, 1926 with a few students, but "On arriving in Otterthal the pilgrims were deeply disappointed to be told that Wittgenstein had resigned his post and had left teaching." (p. 242). Finally in February 1927, Gretl invited Schlick to dinner to meet Wittgenstein, after which, "The next day Wittgenstein told Engelmann: `Each of us thought the other must be mad.' Soon after this, Wittgenstein and Schlick began to meet regularly for discussions." (p. 242). By the summer of 1927 Wittgenstein was drawn into meetings on Monday evenings which included Rudolf Carnap, who reported, "His point of view and his attitude toward people and problems, even theoretical problems, were much more similar to those of a creative artist than to those of a scientist; one might almost say, similar to those of a religious prophet or a seer." (p. 244). Later in the book, Wittgenstein is identified with opposition to science in a form which had invaded philosophy. "You might think Aesthetics is a science telling us what's beautiful - almost too ridiculous for words." (p. 405). He told audiences that he was disgusted with "the worship of science, and he therefore spent some time in these lectures execrating what he considered to be powerful and damaging forms of evangelism for this worship." (p. 404). If that makes more sense to you than anything you previously knew about philosophy, this book might be a good way to learn about philosophy. "Wittgenstein quotes two kinds of explanation from the work of Freud, which illustrate, respectively, the kind of reductive account that he thought should be avoided at all costs, and the other `style of thinking' that he was trying to promote." (p. 405). Wittgenstein is given credit for appreciating Freud's JOKES AND THEIR RELATIONS TO THE UNCONSCIOUS, in which "One of Heine's characters, a humble lottery-agent, in boasting about his relations with Baron Rothschild, remarks: `He treated me quite as his equal - quite familionairely'. The reason this makes us laugh, Freud claims, . . . there is actually something rather unpleasant about being treated with a rich man's condescension." (pp. 406-407). Wittgenstein's aesthetic analysis of such explanations leads into a way of appreciating art. "But the important thing was that I read the poems entirely differently, more intensely, and said to others: `Look! This is how they should be read.' " (p. 407). In the picture section, numbers 44 & 45 show a post card, with a picture of "The Pilgrim of Peace/ Bravo ! Mr. Chamberlain" that he didn't send to anyone. There is no address or postage stamp, but he wrote the message, "In case you want an Emetic, there it is." Signed LudW, it might be considered typical of what was considered humor on college campuses, but most of this book is on a higher level.
|
