Thanks Tosh! I don’t know this book but I too read him and find that he’s always trying to describe what can’t be explained. If he had lived in a different culture he might have been a Zen Roshi.
Yes, I think he would disagree because the Western philosophical tradition was unable or unwilling to accept the idea the “ what is empty is full, what is full is empty.” It seems to me that he was constantly struggling with that idea and his very act of trying to describe the thesis defeated it.
Thanks Tosh! I don’t know this book but I too read him and find that he’s always trying to describe what can’t be explained. If he had lived in a different culture he might have been a Zen Roshi.
There is something Zen about Wittgenstein, but he would disagree. Or wouldn't he? I think about his work often as a writer.
Yes, I think he would disagree because the Western philosophical tradition was unable or unwilling to accept the idea the “ what is empty is full, what is full is empty.” It seems to me that he was constantly struggling with that idea and his very act of trying to describe the thesis defeated it.