Epistemological Issue 3: Dewey and Wittgenstein

                John Dewey, a philosopher from the U.S., calls for a new focus for philosophy: rather than trying to find certainty in matters of reality and knowledge, Dewey calls for philosophers to focus on finding security against the ravages of nature. Science, he held, could contribute to this project, a project that could provide meaning in people’s lives.

                Wittgenstein began his career with the optimistic goal of finding a logical structure in language that reflected a logical order in the world. He later abandoned this project in favor of the view that philosophy, like mathematics and other disciplines, consisted of “language games.”

                STRENGTHS: Dewey appealed to those with a scientific orientation. He did so at a time when the U.S. was promoting the dream of material and moral progress through science.

                Wittgenstein’s transformation from a logical atomist to an advocate of philosophy as therapy reflects a shift from foundationalism to non-foundationalism that was taking place in the larger culture. Wittgenstein’s writings provide a personal account of this cultural shift.

                WEAKNESSES:  Dewey was highly optimistic that science could, as he put it, protect humans from the ravages of nature. The optimism that he shared with many of his day has been tempered—if not dashed—by the applications of science to promote war, weapons of mass destruction, and seemingly irreversible damage to the physical environment.

                Wittgenstein’s view that philosophy is a language game seems to trivialize philosophy and lead to skepticism. While Wittgenstein might reply that some games are serious, a danger still remains. A permanent impression may be left in the reader that philosophy is not to be taken seriously. This issue may be addressed by noting that, even as therapy, philosophy has a serious intent. Language games may be viewed as conceptual models similar to those in medicine. Different conceptual models (physiological, holistic, and so forth) of health and disease have helped physicians to prevent and cure diseases in individuals. In a similar fashion, various models (measures of right action, moral standards, and so forth) of justice and injustice have helped society’s healers to prevent or end tyranny in societies.