Abstract
This paper presents refutation against one of the most infamous rationalisations in philosophy, Wittgenstein’s Private Language Argument. My counterargument is based on a potential misconception in attributing certain limited properties to the definition of transiency. If my understanding of the term is correct, this partially collapses the Private Language Argument.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Published version (
Free)
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
