Community Rules: What Does Kripke’s Sceptical Paradox Imply for Private Language?

Julien Kloeg

Abstract


Wittgenstein’s private language argument is often taken to imply that an individual could not master a language by himself. This conclusion is explicitly drawn in Saul Kripke’s interpretation of Wittgenstein on the basis of general considerations on rule-following. But is an individual really not able to follow rules, as Kripke also contends? In this paper I argue for a novel conception of rule-following that can incorporate the insights of the private language argument without accepting its most counterintuitive implication.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Blackburn, Simon. “The Individual Strikes Back.” Synthese 58 (1984): 281-301. Print.

Boghossian, Paul. “The Rule-Following Considerations.” Mind 98.392. (1989): 507-549. Print.

Davies, Stephen. “Kripke, Crusoe and Wittgenstein.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 66.1. (1988): 52-66. Print.

Gauker, Christopher. “A New Skeptical Solution.” Acta Analytica, 113.14. (1995): 113-129. Print.

Kripke, Saul. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language: An Elementary Exposition. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1982. Print.

Law, Stephen. “Five Private Language Arguments.” International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 12.2. (2004): 159-176. Print.

Shogenji, Tomoji. (2000) “The Problem of the Criterion in Rule-Following.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60.3. (2000): 501-525. Print.

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations (transl. G.E.M. Anscombe), second edition. Basil Blackwell: Oxford, 1958. Print.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.