Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius

I bought Ray Monk’s biography of Wittgenstein because I wanted to know why he was considered one of the 20th Century’s major philosophers. First, a word about the structure of the book. It is a detailed serial narrative – he did this and then he did that, right to the end, where he dies. Period. No concluding summary of his importance of his philosophy or other similar wrap-ups. When W publishes something or lectures seriously about something, Monk spends some brief time giving his opinion about its content, but he never dives so deep into the subject that you give up trying to follow. So this book never flagged, and I read it easily through its 600 pages. What did I conclude? One, that a lot of his reputation is based on a cult of personality, based on some of these factors: as a rising philosopher, he was young, attractive, informally dressed; in lecture he was demanding, with the speed of flow of his ideas making him hard to follow, making him mysterious. His personal eccentricities added to interest in him. Some quotes: . . . the fervent allegiance to W that was given by most of the young Cambridge philosophers as this time. Ryle was disturbed to find that veneration for W was so incontinent that mentions of any other philosophers were greeted with jeers. . . . W himself often felt that he had a bad influence on his students, People imitated his gestures, adopted his expressions, even wrote philosophy in a way that made use of his techniques – all, it seems, without understanding the point of his work. The second thing that I concluded was that his concepts were so difficult to understand that it’s questionable that there will be a continuing interest in his published works. He wrote two major books. The first, the Tractatus, he later decided that it was full of faults, and his philosophy went off in another direction, finally ending up as what was published in Philosophical Investigations. of which Monk writes: . . .Other great philosophical works can be read with interest and entertainment by someone who wants to know “what the philosopher said”. But if Philosophical Investigations is read in this spirit it will quickly become boring and a chore to read, not because it is intellectually difficult, but because it will be practically impossible to gather what W is saying. Other quotes regarding difficulty: (Regarding a series of debates with Alan Turing) , . . many of those who attended did not grasp what was at stake between the two. They were on the whole more interested in W than in mathematics. Malcolm, although he was aware that W was doing something important, understood almost nothing of the lectures until ten years later. . . . she asked him how many people he thought understood his philosophy. He pondered the question for a long time before he replied, Two”. All the above comments may be criticized by professional philosophers who will say that I can’t even follow the basic arguments that are currently interesting in philosophy. That’s probably true, but that’s largely because those arguments have little value for me. I want to add, as sort of an analogy, my reaction to a biography of Willem de Kooning, read for the same reason: why is he important? I found the same cult of personality and, on my part, the same lack of understanding of his works. People who will pay millions for one of his paintings will claim that they understand what he is saying. It’s always cool to say you understand something that you can’t have the slightest knowledge about. For me it’s true of de Kooning, and I end up wondering how true it may be of Wittgenstein. The book is highly recommended. Whether you agree with my ideas of W’s importance or not, this is a superb biography, clearly written and always interesting.

Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius (1990), by Ray Monk, is a superb biography that illuminates both the life and the work of a modern genius. A critic writing for The Christian Science Monitor states: "Great philosophical biographies can be counted on one hand. Monk's life of Wittgenstein is such a one. It's a probing, moving experience." Ludwig Josef Johann Wittgenstein was born on April 27, 1889, in Vienna, Austria-Hungary. He died at the age of 62 on April 29, 1951, in Cambridge, England. Many academic professionals rate him as the most important and most influential philosopher of the 20th century. Wittgenstein had two completely different careers: the “early" Wittgenstein, author of Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921), a work which many critics believed (incorrectly) that Wittgenstein was a logical positivist, and the “late” Wittgenstein, author of Philosophical Investigations (published posthumously in 1953) in which he argued that all philosophical "problems" are merely linguistic confusions--misunderstandings of the proper use of language. In Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Wittgenstein wrote: "Philosophy aims at the logical clarification of thoughts. Philosophy is not a body of doctrine but an activity. A philosophical work consists essentially of elucidations. Philosophy does not result in 'philosophical propositions,' but rather in the clarification of propositions. Without philosophy, thoughts are, as it were, cloudy and indistinct: its task is to make them clear and to give them sharp boundaries." A person who is only passingly familiar with Wittgenstein and his philosophy probably has heard at least of Wittgenstein's explication of "language games," a method which, he affirms shows that the words and concepts of our various "languages" are rooted in our idiosyncratic "life-stream" and are formed by the particular culture which we inherited and inhabit. Wittgenstein's explanation of how "language games" work (and often don't work) is one of the most fascinating and intriguing aspects of his philosophy, especially as found in his Philosophical Investigations. Wittgenstein also stated, "Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." The aim in philosophy is to dispel the fog of confusion, or to use another metaphor, "to show the fly the way out of the fly-bottle." At Trinity College, Cambridge, Wittgenstein was a protégé, and later the "master," of another world-famous philosopher, Bertrand Russell, who described Wittgenstein's philosophy as "a curious kind of logical mysticism." A troubled and tortured individual, Wittgenstein is portrayed by Ray Monk as a relentless truth-seeker who struggled to live with ethical seriousness, honesty, and integrity. Was Wittgenstein a genius? Dictionary.com provides this definition: "genius.--[a person] having an exceptional natural capacity of intellect, especially as shown in creative and original work in science, art, music, etc.: the genius of Mozart." One's evaluation and assessment of Wittgenstein's ostensible genius depends not only upon one's level of intelligence and culture, but also upon one's own philosophical stance, including the ability, or inability, to "see" life and the world from a perspective akin to Wittgenstein's. Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius is a brilliant work that presents an embarrassment of riches defying the ability of reviewers to do it justice. If it is legitimate to make such a claim, Ray Monk shows in this volume that in the genre of writing biographies, he is himself a genius! ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Ray Monk is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Southampton, England, where he has taught since 1992. His interests lie in the philosophy of mathematics, the history of analytic philosophy, and philosophical aspects of biographical writing. His works include Bertrand Russell: The Spirit of Solitude, 1872-1921 (1996); Bertrand Russell: The Ghost of Madness, 1921-1970 (2001); and Robert Oppenheimer: A Life Inside the Center (2014).

If you've heard of Wittgenstein and want to know more about him, I don't recommend this book be your first point of contact. For one, it doesn't explain his philosophy very well or explain why he's voted time after time the most important philosopher of the 20th century. Also, the level of detail in the book flattens out the view of Wittgenstein so you'll end of seeing him as an eccentric, dominating personality rather than the hero of the Life of the Mind that I believe he was. Start instead with Norman Malcolm's memoir, which is short and accessible to the lay reader. With that said, this book has made a good contribution to overall knowledge about Wittgenstein, including many aspects of his life that were not previously covered in other sources: the young woman he seriously contemplated marrying, his crushes on men, the dutiful bonds with his family in Vienna (I had the impression that after he gave away all the money he inherited from his father that he was done with his family), his times in the wilds of Norway, the vicissitudes of his relationship with Bertrand Russell, and more. There are many fantastic passages from others' letters, diaries and reminiscences that were not available elsewhere. I agree with some other reviewers that the paperback edition is printed on cheap paper that feels lousy to the touch. In addition, the reproduction of photographs included in the book is horrible.

I chose to read this because I wanted an easy and gentle introduction to Wittgenstein, and because I thought that Wittgenstein might have something useful to say to Psychotherapy and Psychiatry. Reading it as a Psychiatrist I was intrigued and pleased to learn that Wittgenstein encouraged many of his students to give up Philosophy for a career in Medicine or Psychiatry, and he himself contemplated this course of action at one point. As a Psychiatrist I was also drawn into thinking about Wittgenstein's own quality of mental health. Wittgenstein was a self-declared follower of Freud and drew parallels between his project and psychoanalysis. In this regard what come to mind is Freud's definition of mental health in terms of 'lieben und arbeiten'(to love and to work). In these terms, was Wittgenstein an example of mental health? He comes across as having been unhappy for much of his life, tormented by feelings of guilt and inadequacy which seemed to alternate with narcissistic contempt for the world and people around him. But beyond this, was he capable of work and love? A good life isn't of necessity a happy life. Other than Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and an Austrian primary school dictionary, he seems to have not completed any single piece of work in his lifetime. Much of what was published in his lifetime are fragments which were collated by his students and friends, and which were subject to continuous revision and amendment. His major work, Philosophical Investigations, was published after his death and the second half, it seems, was essentially still a work-in-progress, a collection of notes which he intended to return to and refine. He was never happy with his own work, and frequently stated that he believed he had produced little or nothing of value in his lifetime. On the other hand, perhaps this shifting, unfinished quality of his work is in keeping with his message: that truth cannot be pinned down, and that philosophy (and language) has meaning only as part of the 'flow of life'. What comes to mind here is the Buddhist assertion that the dharma is 'neither deficient nor complete, neither defiled nor immaculate' (from 'The Heart Sutra'). His work might never have been completed, but his impact has been huge, so perhaps we can take it that he met the 'work' criterion of mental health. What about his capacity to love? It is clear that Wittgenstein was chronically unhappy in love, falling in love with several younger men (and one woman) but apparently unable to bring himself to, or allow himself, real intimacy. It seems he battled against his homosexuality and this was a major part of his anguish and self-recrimination. Not only was he apparently incapable of mutual love, he was capable of real hurtful behaviour which was almost sadistic at times, such as his abusive treatment of his pupils when he was a primary school teacher. It seems that as his life progressed he developed some awareness of these aspects of his personality and expressed deep remorse about his actions, to the extent of going back to apologise to the children he had hurt. But was he capable of real empathy? I am inclined to agree with those who have speculated that he had Asperger's syndrome: he just 'didn't get' other people, and to the extent that he understood the people around him it seems that this was due to his ability to bring his huge analytical intelligence to bear on the problem, rather than any intuitive capacity for empathy. Despite this, Wittgenstein had some deep and enduring life-long friendships, with people who could tolerate his emotional intensity and egocentricity, and furthermore he was deeply loved by some, for example Frances Skinner (whose love it seems he deliberately chose to spurn). Wittgenstein was clearly connected into a web of relationships and so I would concede that he met the 'love' criterion of mental health, in his own very odd way. Did he have a good life? His dying words were, apparently, "Tell them I've had a wonderful life." (p 579) And where does this book take me in my own intellectual 'flow of life'? I've decided I have to read some Tolstoy and some Dostoyevsky, two authors who seemed to have had a significant formative impact on Wittgenstein and who are referred to repeatedly in his biography. Oh and -- by the way, it's a great book! Read it!

A biography has one job: explain how this person became this person. This book purposely mixes "near him" with "important to him". Wittgenstein went to the same school as H**ler for a short time. So what? That tells me nothing about Wittgenstein. It is gossip. Same with Kraus and Weininger. The book spends too much time on them because they are dramatic, ugly, and interesting in a cheap way. But being part of the same Viennese air is not the same as shaping Wittgenstein's mind. Real influence leaves a mark. Frege mattered. Russell mattered. Engineering mattered. War mattered. Religious and ethical seriousness mattered. Kraus and Weininger do not explain Wittgenstein’s philosophy in any serious way. This supposedly authoritative Wittgenstein biography is very seriously dishonest, making side characters look central because the author enjoys writing about them. And with Wittgenstein it is especially annoying because he cared about cutting away nonsense. He cared about saying only what needed to be said. Then this biography buries him under irrelevant details, historical mood, and dramatic side material.

Once, when Wittgenstein was staying with a British family, the two young daughters had trouble pronouncing his German name so they called him “Vicky.” Wittgenstein let it go but made sure they were the ONLY ones allowed to call him that. This kind of anecdote, combined with one of the clearest explanations of Wittgenstein’s philosophical views I have read, makes this superb book a joy to read. Meticulously researched and engagingly written, this biography of one of the most original 20th century philosophers draws the reader into the flow of Wittgenstein’s life. Across all disciplines one can count on one hand the number of people who openly admit that their early work that gave them a name in their discipline is wrong. But the so-called “later” Wittgenstein does just that. It took someone who was in so many ways psychologically independent of mainstream society and uncaring about academic approval to do that. Monk traces for the reader the development of the Tractatus, Wittgenstein’s complicated relationship with Russell, his ambiguous often hostile feelings about Cambridge, and his constant desire to be alone (especially in Norway) and subsequent fear of loneliness. He details in lucid fashion Wittgenstein’s experiences in both world wars and his struggles putting together Philosophical Investigations, a dozen-year project that Wittgenstein finally came to realize would only be published after his death. Monk shows how Wittgenstein gradually came to see the limitations of logic and arrive at his unique approach to ethics, aesthetics, and religion. (Russell said that Wittgenstein developed his later ideas because he was “tired of serious thinking.”) Other philosophers, and other disciplines like anthropology, have made similar points about human knowledge. But no one has ever presented the incisive analysis of different elements of creative “seeing” like Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein has been called a philosopher’s philosopher and his name does not pop up in the same conversations as Sartre or Russell. (He would likely not care.) This book will challenge any preconceived image or stereotype we have of this most unusual man and it “shows” (as well as “says”) why Wittgenstein is considered such an original thinker. I recommend this biography in the strongest terms.

“Well, God has arrived. I met him on the 5.15 train” (quoting Keynes, 255). “Then the startling words; said Black, ‘I wonder if you would be so kind, Professor Wittgenstein…’ Well, when Black said ‘Wittgenstein’ a loud and instantaneous gasp went up from the assembled students. You must remember: ‘Wittgenstein’ was a mysterious and awesome name in the philosophical world of 1949, at Cornell in particular. The gasp that went up was just the gasp that would have gone up if Black had said ‘I wonder if you would be so kind, Plato…'” (quoting Nelson, 558). Ludwig Wittgenstein was, as the above quotations betray, a towering philosophical giant in the 20th century — possibly, the greatest of his generation. In this fine, magisterial biography, Ray Monk details this illustrious yet tortured life. Born into an lucrative family of immense wealth in Austria, young Ludwig displayed no early signs of “genius,” unlike his older siblings. Eventually, though, Ludwig would be possessed by his own “genius,” not of musical talent but of intellectual rigor. One could say that the impetus of Wittgenstein’s philosophical career is to learn how to say something clearly. Clarity was his obsession: “What can be said, can be said clearly” (credits to Michael Pierce’s YouTube, “Wittgenstein in a Nutshell”). This will be the extend of my summary of Wittgenstein’s thought (to be honest, this was the most arduous task of Monk’s book, personally speaking, not because Monk was unclear but the concepts were quite difficult to grasp). Wittgenstein had a long list of friends-become-“fri-enemies.” This is due partly to his passionate, self-assertive nature and his incredulous reaction when learned people (e.g., professors of philosophy) cannot understand or grasp his self-proclaimed clear reasonings. On more than one occasion, Wittgenstein would storm out in frustration if he sensed his audience or interlocutor misunderstand and misappropriate his words and sentences. Yet, this is not to mean that Wittgenstein did not cherish friendships — but the very opposite. Yes, he would dominate most conversations about his own philosophical inquiries. Yes, he would, at times, escape the lurid, egoistic life of London to be isolated in Norway. But he would also regularly mail impassioned letters to old and new friends, watch movies (Westerns were his favorite), attend concerts, and go on long walks coupled with intimate conversations. Moments before he lost consciousness, he told his host-friend, Mrs Bevan (the wife of the doctor who treated during Wittgenstein’s last years), to tell his friends: “Tell them I’ve had a wonderful life.” sooholee.wordpress

I brought the book used and it came in very good condition. It’s a bit hard to read, but even so I enjoyed reading it. Made me a Wittgenstein fan more than before.

私自身はヴィトゲンシュタインに興味を持ちつつも、著書を読もうとする度に中途で挫折している。そして評伝などを読んでみては、彼に惹き付けられて、また挑戦することになる。 この伝記はあまりに面白いエピソードが多くて、文字どおり一気に読んでしまった。 英語もわかりやすい。英語を勉強するためにこの本を読むことも良いだろう。これだけ内容のある本で、読みやすい本はあまりないと思う。ただしかなり分厚い本である。

A very deep and interesting book on Wittgenstein where he comes out as a human being with warts and all. Does not dilute the man's contribution to philosophy through 'over simplification'. An excellent book.

Todo perfecto

Professor Monk delivers an astonishing mix of first rate biography and philosophical explanations. It will stand the test of time of the best biography by all means.

Quelle vie ! Si quiconque désire savoir ce qu'est "être au Travail", cette bibliographie de Wittgenstein lui en donnera le goût précis.