‘Snakes and Ladders’ – ‘Therapy’ as Liberation in Nagarjuna and Wittgenstein’s Tractatus

Author:

Smith Joshua WilliamORCID

Abstract

AbstractThis paper reconsiders the notion that Nagarjuna and Wittgenstein’s Tractatus may only be seen as comparable under a shared ineffability thesis, that is, the idea that reality is impossible to describe in sensible discourse. Historically, Nagarjuna and the early Wittgenstein have both been widely construed as offering either metaphysical theories or attempts to refute all such theories. Instead, by employing an interpretive framework based on a ‘resolute’ reading of the Tractatus, I suggest we see their philosophical affinity in terms of a shared conception of philosophical method without proposing theses. In doing so, this offers us a new way to understand Nagarjuna’s characteristic claims both to have ‘no views’ (Mūlamadhyamakakārikā 13.8 and 27.30) and refusal to accept that things exist ‘inherently’ or with ‘essence’ (svabhāva). Therefore, instead of either a view about the nature of a mind-independent ‘ultimate reality’ or a thesis concerning the rejection of such a domain, I propose that we understand Nagarjuna’s primary aim as ‘therapeutic’, that is, concerned with the dissolution of philosophical problems. However, this ‘therapy’ should neither be confined to the psychotherapeutic metaphor nor should it be taken to imply a private enlightenment only available to philosophers. Instead, for Nagarjuna and Wittgenstein, philosophical problems are cast as a source of disquiet for all of us; what their work offers is a soteriology, a means towards our salvation.

Funder

University of East Anglia

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Philosophy,Religious studies

Reference74 articles.

1. Garfield, J. L. (Ed.). (Trans.) (1995). The fundamental wisdom of the middle way, Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakakārikā. New York: Oxford University Press.

2. Siderits, M., & Katsura, S. (Eds.). (Trans.) (2013). Nāgārjuna’s middle way: Mūlamadhyamakārikā. Boston: Wisdom Publications.

3. Anscombe, G. E. M. (Ed.). (Trans.) (1997). Philosophical investigations. Oxford Blackwell.

4. Ogden, C. K. (Ed.). (Trans.) (1922). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. London: Routledge.

5. Anderson, T. (1985). Wittgenstein and Nāgārjuna’s paradox. Philosophy East and West, 35(2), 157–169.

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. The Ancient Roots of Wittgenstein's Liberatory Philosophy;Engaging Kripke with Wittgenstein;2023-08-25

2. Baldwin and Wittgenstein on White Supremacism and Religion;Journal of the American Academy of Religion;2023-06-01

3. "Emptiness" as Aspect: Nāgārjuna and the Later Wittgenstein;Philosophy East and West;2023-04

4. Wittgenstein, Nāgārjuna and relational quantum mechanics;Educational Philosophy and Theory;2022-03-02

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3