At the Boundaries of Language: Galdós, Wittgenstein, and the Problem of Pacifism

Abstract

AbstractSometimes, pacifism finds itself in a paradoxical situation. Renouncing war as an acceptable means to settle a dispute, the pacifist runs the risk of neglecting the defense of those whose very existence is threatened by violent forces. When this is the case, pacifism may be considered as a peculiar form of involuntary wrongdoing. This paper explores the dilemmas and the internal inconsistencies of pacifism by means of two different strategies: (1) the analysis of the ethics of war and peace in Benito Pérez Galdós’ Aita Tettauen, and (2) the comparison of said ethics with Ludwig Wittgenstein’s notion of ethics as expounded in his Notebooks 1914-1916, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, and “A Lecture on Ethics.” This article argues that Galdós deconstructs the dichotomy war/peace by placing pacifism - embodied by the main character, the writer Santiuste - within the structure of war. He does so, however, in an ambiguous way. Instead of openly denouncing or supporting Santiuste’s pacifism, Galdós presents his main character with irony, a literary technique that makes it difficult to determine whether the novel endorses or criticizes Santiuste’s brand of pacifism. Uttered always in absolute terms, ethical propositions go against the boundaries of our language by trying to say what cannot be expressed. Aita Tettauen demonstrates the ambiguity inherent to ethical stances such as pacifism. Galdós, like Wittgenstein years later, placed ethical issues at the boundaries of language.