Abstract

AbstractBuilding on the unpublished correspondence between Ludwig Wittgenstein's literary executors Rush Rhees, Elizabeth Anscombe and Georg Henrik von Wright, this paper sketches the historical development of different editorial approaches to Wittgenstein's Nachlass. Using the metaphor of a ladder, it is possible to distinguish seven significant “rungs” or “steps” in the history of editing Wittgenstein's writings. The paper focuses particularly on the first four rungs, elucidating how Rhees, Anscombe and von Wright developed different editorial approaches that resulted in significant differences in their editions. The paper sheds light on how these editorial differences are grounded in the editors' divergent understandings of their task. It is suggested that future research may investigate the development of editorial approaches to Wittgenstein's Nachlass as a human story of philosophical inheritance.

Highlights

  • Building on the unpublished correspondence between Ludwig Wittgenstein’s literary executors Rush Rhees, Elizabeth Anscombe and Georg Henrik von Wright, this paper sketches the historical development of different editorial approaches to Wittgenstein’s Nachlass

  • The paper focuses on the first four rungs, elucidating how Rhees, Anscombe and von Wright developed different editorial approaches that resulted in significant differences in their editions

  • I am deeply grateful that Peg Smythies permitted me to quote from Rush Rhees’ letters; sadly, she passed away while this paper was in preparation

Read more

Summary

The Seven Rungs of Editing Wittgenstein

The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (TLP 1922) was the only philosophical book that Ludwig Wittgenstein published during his lifetime, but he left to posterity about 18 000 unpublished pages, which were written between 1929 to 1951. This paper focuses largely on what von Wright called round one, distinguishing within it four rungs that represent the different editorial approaches of the three literary executors. Anscombe and von Wright did not conceal their editorial interventions, but scholars have criticised how the brevity of their prefaces and the uniform appearance of the books make it difficult for readers to recognise which Nachlass sources were used and how they were used to create some of the editions.. Exploring the editors’ reasons and motives for their unique ways of editing may shed light on the history of editing Wittgenstein’s Nachlass – as a field for editorial–philological questions, but as a human story of philosophical inheritance Encouraging this perspective, this paper offers glimpses into the hitherto unpublished correspondence between Wittgenstein’s literary executors with the aim of sketching how their editorial approaches developed historically

Rung 1: Wittgenstein’s Chef d’ouvre
Rung 2
Rung 3
Rung 4: von Wright’s Text-Genetic Editing
Rung 5
Not Throwing Away the Ladder
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call