Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
When Wittgenstein is called a pragmatist, it is usually with qualification. In this paper, I examine some of the criteria used to relate Wittgenstein to pragmatism (primacy of action, anti-foundationalism, fallibilism), and conclude that inasmuch as Wittgenstein is neither an anti-foundationalist nor a fallibilist, there may not be sufficient grounds to call him a pragmatist. But nothing stands in the way of considering him a full-fledged enactivist. Quando si chiama Wittgenstein pragmatista, di solito si hanno buone ragioni per farlo. In questo saggio esamino alcuni dei criteri usati per mettere in relazione Wittgenstein con il pragmatismo (primato dell’azione, anti-fondazionalismo, fallibilismo) e concludo che, nella misura in cui Wittgenstein non e ne un antifondazionalista ne un fallibilista, non ci sono ragioni sufficienti per chiamarlo pragmatista. Ma nulla osta a considerarlo appieno un enattivista.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danièle Moyal‐Sharrock (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: