Wittgenstein's Social Reality

Shawn

When talking about Wittgenstein's latter work, it's important to note the importance of social norms in the cosm of the individual.

Wittgenstein advocated an adherence to social norms in life, or what can otherwise be called earning or even accepting your labels. Language games between people as time progresses is determined by the social reality in which one lives in and seemingly comes to accept, stipulatively regarding whether one wants to reaffirm their social identity. Laws, politics, social norms play a significant role in becoming who you really are.

This has mostly been true sociologically for the period since Wittgenstein's life until his death in Europe. Yet, since then social norms around the world have somewhat deteriorated or significantly improves for minorities in the West, and even Russia. What I mean by this is that the importance of laws is not respected enough in engendering social norms that one engages in and for blacks in the use the refusal to accept social norms in the 1950's onwards.

I have yet, one observation to make about this. Namely, what is the role of present day man in regards to social norms that are becoming increasingly economical? In my past I have wondered whether "death" is becoming less of a social norm or deviating from it in regards to longevity companies.

Furthermore, with regard to the social reality of the 1970's and increasing computerization, one can imagine that social norms are becoming increasingly reinforced.

What are your thoughts about the above?

Banno

Wittgenstein advocated an adherence to social norms in life, or what can otherwise be called earning or even accepting your labels. — Shawn

Can you support this conjecture?

Shawn

Can you support this conjecture? — Banno

Well, yes, by the very fact of how bias and norms create quasi-rules of how language is used in a society. I understand that terms become reified with time as these tendencies abate or are pressured due to how social norms progress.

I can also mention the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or the Flynn effect likewise.

Amalac

Well, yes, by the very fact of how bias and norms create quasi-rules of how language is used in a society. I understand that terms become reified with time as these tendencies abate or are pressured due to how social norms progress. — Shawn

I think this is correct, basically one has to respect (to some extent at least) the rules of language implicit in each particular form of life, to avoid social dissaproval, or even going to jail.

One of my university professors gave as an example of this a time where he was invited to give a talk about corruption in a very corrupt country (one where he was very critical of it), and during his talk he had to go with a group of cops who were behind him, because his life was literally in danger just by doing that.

From what I've heard, such things do happen more often that one would think at first.

Luke

Well, yes, by the very fact of how bias and norms create quasi-rules of how language is used in a society. I understand that terms become reified with time as these tendencies abate or are pressured due to how social norms progress. — Shawn

In what sense does Wittgenstein advocate an adherence to these norms?

Fooloso4

No one creates the rules for how language is used, but if you wish to say something and be understood you use grammatical language. This applies even to the asocial and anti-social.

Banno

Well, yes, by the very fact of how bias and norms create quasi-rules of how language is used in a society. I understand that terms become reified with time as these tendencies abate or are pressured due to how social norms progress.

I can also mention the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or the Flynn effect likewise. — Shawn

I am asking, can you cite an example of the specific assertion, "Wittgenstein advocated an adherence to social norms in life"... either direct quotes or secondary summations?

↪Luke

Indeed.

Banno

↪Fooloso4

Hence my question. I would say Wittgenstein advocated keeping track of the rules one was using, or going against; but not blind adherence to them.

Fooloso4

↪Banno

I think the idea of adherence to the rules of language paints a false picture. It is not as if we follow a rule book. When Wittgenstein used the analogy of a game in PI one thing he pointed to was that not all games are played according to pre-established rules. Some games you make up as you go along.

Banno

↪Fooloso4

I quite agree. The suggestion in the OP strikes me as a conservative misreading. Hence my request for further information, for which we will wait.

Shawn

Hence my question. I would say Wittgenstein advocated keeping track of the rules one was using, or going against; but not blind adherence to them. — Banno

I think the idea of adherence to the rules of language paints a false picture. It is not as if we follow a rule book. — Fooloso4

I think linguistics and social sciences provide a large degree of information towards this sentiment by the very way we obey from childhood certain implicit or explicit "rules".

Shawn

I quite agree. The suggestion in the OP strikes me as a conservative misreading. Hence my request for further information, for which we will wait. — Banno

I think you know all about the life of Wittgenstein in treating his life as a 'duty' or even in personal letters to Russell. And, then finally becoming antiphilosophical in Cambridge and saying one ought to simply live out these social norms in a reality presented in which one accepts (or remains sane) in these sentiments of society.

Streetlight

Wittgenstein advocated an adherence to social norms in life, or what can otherwise be called earning or even accepting your labels. Language games between people as time progresses is determined by the social reality in which one lives in and seemingly comes to accept, stipulatively regarding whether one wants to reaffirm their social identity. — Shawn

As others have pointed out, this is an incorrect reading of Wittgenstein. Gesturing vaguely to "lingustics and social science" and the fact that "Wittgenstein treated life as a duty" is not even remotely the kind of evidence needed to back up this claim.

Banno

↪Shawn

SO let me be even more specific. Your claim is:

Wittgenstein advocated an adherence to social norms in life, or what can otherwise be called earning or even accepting your labels. — Shawn

Far from that, Wittgenstein repeatedly rejected the labels assigned to him, moving restlessly from heir to a fortune to engineer to philosopher to teacher to hermit to architect to hospital orderly... while explicitly rejecting being labeled a behaviourist or logical atomist or logical empiricist.

I think you need to drop mention of Wittgenstein from your thesis.

Shawn

Far from that, Wittgenstein repeatedly rejected the labels assigned to him, moving restlessly from heir to a fortune to engineer to philosopher to teacher to hermit to architect to hospital orderly... while explicitly rejecting being labeled a behaviourist or logical atomist or logical empiricist.

I think you need to drop mention of Wittgenstein from your thesis. — Banno

But, this is how social dynamics evolves through time, no? So, I concede that perhaps dropping Wittgenstein might be necessary.

Shawn

As others have pointed out, this is an incorrect reading of Wittgenstein. — StreetlightX

I kind of advocate, the notion that a social reality where social dynamics evolve in this manner that precisely label individuals, using whatever method necessary to do so, would render one to assume that Wittgenstein should have stated this explicitly, no?

Streetlight

↪Shawn

What?

Shawn

What? — StreetlightX

Nothing. I was interested in a discussion.

Shawn

In what sense does Wittgenstein advocate an adherence to these norms? — Luke

Wittgenstein might have not said this, and I mistakenly said that he did; but, isn't it a feature of language that this does actually happen normally?

Shawn

All criticisms aside, I still think there's merit to mentioning that ethics consists, at least extensionally by my own reasoning from Wittgenstein, to an adherence to those very norms in society.

Luke

Wittgenstein might have not said this, and I mistakenly said that he did; but, isn't it a feature of language that this does actually happen normally? — Shawn

That what does actually happen normally? That people follow norms? Yes, that is (statistically) normal.

All criticisms aside, I still think there's merit to mentioning that ethics consists, at least extensionally by my own reasoning from Wittgenstein, to an adherence to those very norms in society. — Shawn

To borrow your own example, do you think it was unethical:

for blacks in the use [U.S.?] the refusal to accept social norms in the 1950's onwards. — Shawn

Shawn

That what does actually happen normally? That people follow norms? Yes, that is (statistically) normal. — Luke

That the feature of ethics in terms of Wittgenstein, happens in regards to what those social norms consist of. I think, that shouldn't be unclear.

Wittgenstein's Social Reality

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions