https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2020/06/annihilation-of-all-yardsticks Safeguarding Humanity Tue, 14 Jul 2020 17:55:59 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.1 https://russian.lifeboat.com/blog/2020/06/annihilation-of-all-yardsticks#comment-408920 Tue, 14 Jul 2020 17:55:59 +0000 https://lifeboat.com/blog/?p=83619#comment-408920 I am grateful for Schulke’s essay. He does a good job of exploring Wittgenstein’s later musings. He almost understands Wittgenstein. All is well until the 2nd last paragraph. There he reveals himself as a person who cannot (yet?) walk the path Wittgenstein puts his feet to — the need to learn to live as faithfully as one can without the assurances of certainty offered by 1st Enlightenment science. Wittgenstein’s point — the point on which Schulke refuses to be skewered — is that the 1st Enlightenment is not a final stage of our development, but a phase to pass through as we continue to mature as persons, groups and whole cultures. Yes, living without certainty cost us more. Critical and logical thought is no longer enough. Wittgenstein’s reality also requires us to be wise, integral and meta-reflexive. This stance, a stance without certainty, offers an opportunity to outgrow our 1st Enlightenment aspirations as we learn to take responsibility as persons in communities for all we claim to know. This insight is at the heart of any 2nd Enlightenment with legs.
In my view, Schulke’s language of an “educated bet” is too left-brained heady, rational and 1st Enlightenment for Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein invites us to test for ultimate reality not by rational calculation, but by our best judgement of the authenticity of our experience. Schulke still seeks, as did Descartes, a “foundation that begins to unravel the absurd” — one that allows us to string together “lines of certainty.” Wittgenstein would offer a smile of encouragement that implies, “Good on you for getting this far, but you can do better than that.” Such is life.

]]>