3

I'm currently interested in Hegel's Dialectic and Wittgenstein works. I'm mostly looking for things related to logic, language and the foundation of mathematics.

  1. What do you think I should read from them ? Should I read Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus from Wittgenstein or should I directly start with Philosophical Investigations ?

  2. I was also wondering if anyone has other related recommendations, maybe something more friendly since I don't have a strong background in philosophy ? (I don't know if Hegel's and Wittgenstein works are difficult to read).

Frank Hubeny
  • 19,136
  • 7
  • 28
  • 89
Boris
  • 878
  • 6
  • 14
  • 3
    Hegel did not write much about logic, language and mathematics (unless we take [Logic in the old sense](http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/37276/what-are-the-differences-between-philosophies-presupposing-one-logic-versus-many/37279#37279) which is very different from the modern one), and he is notoriously hard to read, so I'd start with secondary literature, e.g. [Beiser's Hegel](http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/25003-hegel). If you insist on first hand try [Hegel's Introductions](http://re-press.org/books/reading-hegel-the-introductions) first. – Conifold Dec 14 '16 at 01:10
  • 1
    For Wittgenstein, I think it helps to start in the middle. 'The Blue and Brown Books' are unpublished (by W himself) lectures from the period between the two published works. If you just read both published works, it is like reading two unrelated people, so it does not matter what the order is. –  Dec 14 '16 at 02:27
  • Lakatos' Proofs and Refutations is short and cute, and worth reading for a more modern perspective on how math really works historically, and the resulting messiness proper to the subject, as an anodyne to people who have a carefully thought-out agenda. –  Dec 14 '16 at 02:31
  • @Conifold At first I was interested in the hegelian negation. Is it outdated ? It seems that some ideas from Linear Logic (which is quite new) are taken from Hegel's negation. Maybe something more general about dialectics can be interesting too, I don't know, I only suggested Hegel because he's the only one I know who worked on dialectics. – Boris Dec 14 '16 at 13:47
  • @Jobermark is it still interesting to read the old works from Wittgenstein ? I thought his old ideas were a bit outdated because it seems that he changed his philosophical view during the end of his life. – Boris Dec 14 '16 at 13:49
  • you don't know if Hegel's and Ludwig's works are difficult to read??? Ha! Yes! Just try reading them! You have to tackle them directly if you're really interested, since commentaries are always at least partially wrong. but they can help, as long as you have several. my recommendation is to get 2 or 3 books about them and consult them as you read the originals. doesn't really matter which, just get a variety. hth. –  Dec 14 '16 at 23:06
  • @jobermark I think I will finally begin with "The Blue and Brown Books", thanks. Is one more interesting than the other ? (since you told that it's like reading two unrelated people). I thought can Wittgenstein changed his philosophy during his life so I was wondering if some ideas was kind of outdated or something. – Boris Dec 16 '16 at 00:11
  • I haven't heard of Hegelian influence on linear logic. Are you sure it is not just the [dialogical negation](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-dialogical/#LinLog)? Look at [Hirsch's comparison](http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/r.hirsch/papers/dialectics/cultural_logic.doc.) of formal logic to dialectics to see if it is indeed what you are looking for. If so try [Hegel's Dialectic by Rosen](https://books.google.com/books?id=S6bPm1qemagC&source=gbs_navlinks_s) on the nature of Hegel's "determinate negation". – Conifold Dec 17 '16 at 01:53
  • 1
    @Conifold maybe it was a wrong interpretation. Jean-Yves Girard, who founded Linear Logic sometimes talk about Hegel's negation and it looked like the involutive negation of linear logic but I don't have any reference in english – Boris Dec 17 '16 at 02:33
  • 1
    @Conifold something I just found : https://nforum.ncatlab.org/discussion/5629/ – Boris Dec 17 '16 at 02:39
  • Interesting. "*To negate A is not to refute it, but to recuse it: instead of the hanging judge, the bleaching prosecutor. This remark is essential to vindicate... Hegel. The mistake about Hegel is to take negation in the alethic (i.e., -1) sense, for which there cannot be any honest contradictory foundations; there are dishonest ones, e.g., paraconsistent "logic"*". This does sound inspired by "determinate negation", but vaguely inspired. Girard's "transcendental syntax" seems to be inspired even more by Kant. – Conifold Dec 17 '16 at 21:57
  • Yeah. It's true that he's a lot inspired by Kant. I wanted to read The Critique of Pure Reason but I thought it would be too difficult to read it now (since it's known to be hard to read). If you have anything to suggest I would be interested. As for Girard, his ideas looks interesting but they're difficult to understand for me, maybe I need a stronger background (Even though he's not a philosopher and doesn't seem to consider himself as such). – Boris Dec 18 '16 at 01:28
  • My recommendation would be to read "Words and things" by Gellner and "Conjectures and Refutations" by Karl Popper Chapter 2 instead of Wittgenstein. – alanf Jan 04 '17 at 09:19
  • @alanf What are your arguments ? – Boris Jan 04 '17 at 09:34
  • @Conifold Thanks for editing my answer ! It's better now. – Boris Jan 04 '17 at 16:24
  • Dummet's paper titled ['What is Mathematics About ? '](https://philpapers.org/rec/DUMWIM) (which is not a book )is a good article for anyone who is interested in the philosophy of mathematics I think. – BetaDecay Dec 14 '16 at 23:31

4 Answers4

2

1/ You could just go right to Wittgenstein's "Foundation of Mathematics" but "Philosophical Investigations" is also a good read.

2/ You could do a lot worse than starting off with Russell's "Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy"

Also, I highly recommend this course by Professor Keith Devlin if you are just getting started with university level math: https://www.coursera.org/learn/mathematical-thinking

Harry Gensler's book "Introduction to Logic" is an adequate start - as well, there is his "LogiCola" software.

Lastly, I would strongly recommend that you sit down with Professor John R. Searle and listen to his three free course lectures from philosophy of mind, language and society. They are on iTunes as well as YouTube.

That said, Hegel is a poet, not a philosopher.

MmmHmm
  • 2,401
  • 13
  • 28
  • 2
    Thanks for you answer. Why do you consider Hegel as a poet ? – Boris Dec 14 '16 at 13:34
  • @BorisEng Hegel never advanced a single knowledge claims nor the means to state a knowledge claim. Like all poets, he proffers weltanschauung and solicits agreement or disagreement with his sentiment, not rational assessment of truth value. https://youtu.be/w0shWISKpNA – MmmHmm Dec 14 '16 at 18:38
  • 2
    Ok ! But I'm still interested in his ideas (especially dialectic). Learning about beautiful ideas is fine too. – Boris Dec 14 '16 at 20:36
1

Well there is a link between these two philosophers. I first read about it in a book on Wittgenstein by Robert Fogelin on Wittgenstein. Probably this book, but it's been so long ago I don't exactly remember. Title: Wittgenstein Author: Fogelin, Robert J., Publication Date: 1976. So you may want to start with the Phenomenology of Spirit, which Fogelin mentions, I believe. https://www.amazon.com/Wittgenstein-Arguments-Philosophers-Robert-Fogelin/dp/0415119448

Here are some notes of J.N. Findlay on the The Phenomenology of Spirit: https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/help/findlay1.htm

Brandom has done some work on the two: http://www.pitt.edu/~brandom/hegel/downloads/Hegel%20Seminar%20Notes%20for%20Week%201%2010-9-7%20b.docx

Beyond the Phenomenology, a general book by W.T Stace on Hegel, and it is perfectly fine to start with Stace. https://archive.org/details/W.T.StaceThePhilosophyOfHegelDoverPress1955

Also, there are works by Hegel himself on Internet Archive, including the Encyclopedia translation by Wallace.

Another interesting work and with good scholarship: "The Communist Ideal in Hegel and Marx", by David MacGregor. https://www.routledge.com/The-Communist-Ideal-in-Hegel-and-Marx/MacGregor/p/book/9781138892378

This old, old book by the German professor H.M. Chalybaus gives a flavor of the time: "Speculative Philosophy From Kant to Hegel". Which is available in English on Internet Archive. https://archive.org/details/historicalphilo00chaluoft

This quote by Findlay is worth remembering I think:

"Hegel's thought, properly understood, has a place for all the nominalisms, pluralisms, formalisms, materialisms, subjectivisms, mechanisms, structuralisms, and so forth, to which it might seem opposed, so that there is indeed some sense, and not mere absurdity, in identifying it with philosophy itself, rather than with a special philosophy".

JN Findlay, in Hegel The Essential Writings by F. Weiss.

Gordon
  • 1,719
  • 1
  • 9
  • 14
0

I can recommend Logicomix to get started. It's fun.

-1

Hegel and Wittgenstein are difficult to read. Some people seem to take this as a sign of profundity. It's actually a sign that you haven't thought through your ideas well enough to write them down clearly. In addition, Wittgenstein makes many substantive and false philosophical claims about language and philosophy. These claims include the idea that philosophy is about correcting flaws in how people use language, and that many philosophical questions can be easily solved by refusing to say stuff. For criticisms of these claims, and of a load of bad methodology that goes along with them and is still popular among philosophers, see "Words and things" by Ernest Gellner and "Conjectures and Refutations" by Karl Popper Chapter 2.

For good philosophy books about logic and maths see "Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid" by Hofstadter and "The Fabric of Reality" chapters 3 and 5-10 and "The Beginning of Infinity" chapters 5-8 by David Deutsch.

alanf
  • 7,275
  • 12
  • 18