The Wittgenstein connection

Abstract

Sociologists often flatter themselves that their discipline has displaced philosophy or is about to do so. Those problems with which philosophers have struggled in a speculative and ignorant way are now to be dealt with on a properly empirical basis. David Bloor is yet another of those sociologists demanding that philosophers recognise that "the com? petences that are needed to develop Wittgenstein's work do not belong solely, or even primarily, to philosophers" and that they must play a supporting role in helping those (i.e. sociologists) "who must now carry the responsibility for exploiting Wittgenstein's intellectual legacy" (p. 184). This portentous claim concludes an argument which has been de? signed as an interdisciplinary polemic between philosophy and sociolo? gy. It is Bloor's central argument that Wittgenstein has been misleading ly presented as though he would have been a protagonist of the anti positivist position in sociology for this is to ignore the fact that there are strong naturalist and sociological elements in Wittgenstein's work. These elements make him much closer to the positivists than is usually thought, something which is demonstrated by some important con? vergences between Wittgenstein and Durkheim, the arch-positivist. Wittgenstein himself failed to develop the empirical potential of his work, as his followers after him have done, because they have allowed themselves to be inhibited by disciplinary boundaries. They have in? sisted that their work must be remote from empirical concerns and have failed to see that as it stands Wittgenstein's work is incomplete, lacking the capacity to explain crucial things because this would require scientific, not philosophical work. Wittgenstein did recognise the continuity of his own efforts with those of science for he was apt to remark that he was talking about the natural history of humanity but he was, Bloor thinks unfortunately, willing to make use of his imagination, to make up examples. Bloor intends to improve on Wittgenstein by replacing