![WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1889-1951). Autograph letter signed (‘Lud Wittgenst’) to [Moritz] Schlick, n.p., 20 November 1931.](https://www.christies.com.cn/img/LotImages/2017/CKS/2017_CKS_14299_0076_001(wittgenstein_ludwig_autograph_letter_signed_to_moritz_schlick_np_20_no051144).jpg?w=1)
![WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1889-1951). Autograph letter signed (‘Lud Wittgenst’) to [Moritz] Schlick, n.p., 20 November 1931.](https://www.christies.com.cn/img/LotImages/2017/CKS/2017_CKS_14299_0076_002(wittgenstein_ludwig_autograph_letter_signed_to_moritz_schlick_np_20_no051144).jpg?w=1)
![WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1889-1951). Autograph letter signed (‘Lud Wittgenst’) to [Moritz] Schlick, n.p., 20 November 1931.](https://www.christies.com.cn/img/LotImages/2017/CKS/2017_CKS_14299_0076_003(wittgenstein_ludwig_autograph_letter_signed_to_moritz_schlick_np_20_no051144).jpg?w=1)
![WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1889-1951). Autograph letter signed (‘Lud Wittgenst’) to [Moritz] Schlick, n.p., 20 November 1931.](https://www.christies.com.cn/img/LotImages/2017/CKS/2017_CKS_14299_0076_000(wittgenstein_ludwig_autograph_letter_signed_to_moritz_schlick_np_20_no051144).jpg?w=1)
细节
WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1889-1951). Autograph letter signed (‘Lud Wittgenst’) to [Moritz] Schlick, n.p., 20 November 1931.
In German. 6 pages, 230 x 173mm.
An important letter from Wittgenstein to Moritz Schlick, the head of the ‘Vienna Circle’, refuting one of the central tenets of the Tractatus, marking the shift from the ‘early’ to the ‘later’ period: ‘In this way, all the dogmatic things I used to say about “object”, “elementary proposition”, etc, collapse’. Leaping straight to the heart of the matter, Wittgenstein opens directly: 'I cannot tell you anything else in the [Friedrich] Waismann matter', but that he has sent some – overdue – comments in response to Schlick’s letter. Wittgenstein is not convinced that Waismann would accurately represent his beliefs; today, he disagrees with many of the formulae in his book (‘Ich bin mit sehr, sehr vielen Formulierungen des Buches heute nicht einverstanden’). There is nothing for it, but to carry on – thankfully, he has been able to work a great deal lately, since he only lectures two hours a week. He hopes to see Schlick to explain his work and to keep his promise to Hoffman to send excerpts from his manuscript (‘einen vernünftigen, oder verständlichen, Auszug aus meinen Manuscripten’), but wants to make just one comment: ‘I have come to see everything concerning “atomic propositions” (“Elementarsätze”) and “objects” (“Gegenstände”) as full of mistakes’, all needing revision. ‘Perhaps the chief difference between the position held in my book [the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus] and my present view is that I have come to see that the analysis of proposition (‘die Analyse des Satzes’) does not lie in discovering hidden things, but in a tabulation (‘ein Tabulieren’), in giving a comprehensive overview of the grammar – i.e. the grammatical use – of words. In this way, all the dogmatic things I used to say about “object”, “elementary proposition”, etc, collapse. For example, if you want to understand the word “object”, you will have to look and see how it is actually used’. He ends pleading that Schlick continue to hold him in good opinion, ‘trotz allem’.
The present letter contains one of the earliest anticipations of Wittgenstein’s move away from the ‘dogmatic’, logic-centred view of language and its relation to the world that he laid out in the Tractatus (1921), and the more fluid conception articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (posthumously published in 1953), in which he abandons this rigid structure in favour of a more complex world. Here, in his own words, Wittgenstein defines the fundamental difference between the approaches of his ‘early’ and ‘later’ periods. At this time, Moritz Schlick – head of the ‘Vienna Circle’, a group of scientists and philosophers principally inspired by the Tractatus – was collaborating with Wittgenstein, with the aid of Friedrich Waismann, in an attempt to write an account of Wittgenstein’s current philosophical stance. Arguably the most important philosophical content of a Wittgenstein letter at auction since those to C.H. Ogden (Sotheby’s, 1993).
In German. 6 pages, 230 x 173mm.
An important letter from Wittgenstein to Moritz Schlick, the head of the ‘Vienna Circle’, refuting one of the central tenets of the Tractatus, marking the shift from the ‘early’ to the ‘later’ period: ‘In this way, all the dogmatic things I used to say about “object”, “elementary proposition”, etc, collapse’. Leaping straight to the heart of the matter, Wittgenstein opens directly: 'I cannot tell you anything else in the [Friedrich] Waismann matter', but that he has sent some – overdue – comments in response to Schlick’s letter. Wittgenstein is not convinced that Waismann would accurately represent his beliefs; today, he disagrees with many of the formulae in his book (‘Ich bin mit sehr, sehr vielen Formulierungen des Buches heute nicht einverstanden’). There is nothing for it, but to carry on – thankfully, he has been able to work a great deal lately, since he only lectures two hours a week. He hopes to see Schlick to explain his work and to keep his promise to Hoffman to send excerpts from his manuscript (‘einen vernünftigen, oder verständlichen, Auszug aus meinen Manuscripten’), but wants to make just one comment: ‘I have come to see everything concerning “atomic propositions” (“Elementarsätze”) and “objects” (“Gegenstände”) as full of mistakes’, all needing revision. ‘Perhaps the chief difference between the position held in my book [the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus] and my present view is that I have come to see that the analysis of proposition (‘die Analyse des Satzes’) does not lie in discovering hidden things, but in a tabulation (‘ein Tabulieren’), in giving a comprehensive overview of the grammar – i.e. the grammatical use – of words. In this way, all the dogmatic things I used to say about “object”, “elementary proposition”, etc, collapse. For example, if you want to understand the word “object”, you will have to look and see how it is actually used’. He ends pleading that Schlick continue to hold him in good opinion, ‘trotz allem’.
The present letter contains one of the earliest anticipations of Wittgenstein’s move away from the ‘dogmatic’, logic-centred view of language and its relation to the world that he laid out in the Tractatus (1921), and the more fluid conception articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (posthumously published in 1953), in which he abandons this rigid structure in favour of a more complex world. Here, in his own words, Wittgenstein defines the fundamental difference between the approaches of his ‘early’ and ‘later’ periods. At this time, Moritz Schlick – head of the ‘Vienna Circle’, a group of scientists and philosophers principally inspired by the Tractatus – was collaborating with Wittgenstein, with the aid of Friedrich Waismann, in an attempt to write an account of Wittgenstein’s current philosophical stance. Arguably the most important philosophical content of a Wittgenstein letter at auction since those to C.H. Ogden (Sotheby’s, 1993).
注意事项
These lots have been imported from outside the EU for sale using a Temporary Import regime. Import VAT is payable (at 5%) on the Hammer price. VAT is also payable (at 20%) on the buyer’s Premium on a VAT inclusive basis. When a buyer of such a lot has registered an EU address but wishes to export the lot or complete the import into another EU country, he must advise Christie's immediately after the auction.
荣誉呈献
Robert Tyrwhitt