Saving Rule Following from Skepticism in Later Wittgenstein
Yükleniyor...
Tarih
2016
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
İkinci dönem Wittgenstein'ın "mitolojik" ve soyut kural teorilerini ortadan kaldırmakta başarılı olup olmadığı hala tartışılagelen bir konudur. Sorun mühimdir, zira kural takibi kavramı ile alakalı olarak Wittgenstein'ın Platonik, idealist, konvansiyonalist, göreci ve hatta şüpheci görüşlere karşı duruşunu temellendirmektedir. Wittgenstein'ın kapsamlı bir teori ortaya koymakta başarısız olduğu ve hatta takip edilecek hiçbir kuralın mevcut olmadığı gibi septik bir sonucuna vardığı uzun süredir iddia edilmektedir. Bu makalede, kuralın uygulamasını belirleyen zorunlu şartları reddetse dahi Wittgenstein'ın kural mevzusunda septik veya göreci olmadığını iddia etmeye çalışacağım. Bilakis Wittgenstein, pratik temelli bir kural takibi kavramı geliştirir ve klasik nesnel yaklaşımları reddeder. Aslında o kural takibi kavramı ile felsefi tartışmalardaki nesnellik/öznellik, toplum/birey ve zihin/beden gibi temel bazı dikotomileri aşmak ister. Buna ilaveten bireyin kural takibindeki rolünü ve dolayısıyla ahlaki sorumluluğunu vurgular.
Whether the later Wittgenstein succeeded in destroying “the mythologized” and abstract theories of rule following is still a matter for debate. The question is important because it grounds Wittgenstein’s position against a Platonist, idealistic, conventionalist, relativist and even skeptical views regarding the concept of rule following. It has been argued that Wittgenstein’s views on rule following does not succeed in giving a comprehensive theory. Some even argued that Wittgenstein’s views even leads to a skeptical conclusion that there are no rules to be followed. In this article, I argue that when Wittgenstein rejects necessary conditions that determinate the application of rules, he does not slip into a skeptical position. Rather, he introduces a concept of rule following based on practice, rejecting classical objectivist approaches. Through this concept, in fact, Wittgenstein wants to overcome certain dichotomies such as objectivity/subjectivity, society/individual, and mind/body. His views on rule following emphasizes the role of individual in following a rule and thereby his or her moral responsibility.
Whether the later Wittgenstein succeeded in destroying “the mythologized” and abstract theories of rule following is still a matter for debate. The question is important because it grounds Wittgenstein’s position against a Platonist, idealistic, conventionalist, relativist and even skeptical views regarding the concept of rule following. It has been argued that Wittgenstein’s views on rule following does not succeed in giving a comprehensive theory. Some even argued that Wittgenstein’s views even leads to a skeptical conclusion that there are no rules to be followed. In this article, I argue that when Wittgenstein rejects necessary conditions that determinate the application of rules, he does not slip into a skeptical position. Rather, he introduces a concept of rule following based on practice, rejecting classical objectivist approaches. Through this concept, in fact, Wittgenstein wants to overcome certain dichotomies such as objectivity/subjectivity, society/individual, and mind/body. His views on rule following emphasizes the role of individual in following a rule and thereby his or her moral responsibility.
Açıklama
WOS:000441693000001
Anahtar Kelimeler
Felsefe, Rule-Following, Skepticism, Normativity, Criterion, Moral responsibility, Kural takibi, Septisizm, Normativite, Kriter, Ahlaki sorumluluk
Kaynak
Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
6
Sayı
2
Künye
Kılınç Adanalı, Y. (2016). Saving rule following from skepticism in later Wittgenstein. Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy. 6, 2, 1-17.
