My obsession with people named Ludwig is out of control.

I've been thinking a lot lately about Wittgenstein. (If I had a nickel for every time a conversation was opened with that line....) As I understand it, he saw a problem with the way philosophers ask questions. The part that I best remember (from one semester of modern philosophy 4 years ago) is the idea that because arguments are expressed with language, they cannot be expressed objectively as the argument itself is constrained by the language in which it is given. So, even though I've just typed words, because I typed them not only in english, but in the english that makes sense to me, I've already made the argument subjective. He protested a failure to understand the logic of our language. (Is there a difference between beautiful and good?)

This is probably not his point, but I've been worrying about the application of philosophy to science. It may be crazy of me to assume this, but I'm going to go ahead and say that science is more prominent than philosophy nowadays (especially in the job market). Could [my slapdash interpretation of] Wittgenstein have been on to something? Is it possible that there has been an extreme transition from the urge of using language to express ideas into using data?

According to social theories, there are stages of development in relationships. Phatic (you know each others' names), factual (how are you? I am fine.), evaluative (How are you? I am fine. I am glad you are fine.), gut-level (how are you? I am okay, I just found out that I got passed over for that new action movie role), and peak (see: best friend/significant other). I worry that I am permanently stuck in the factual stage. I love reading new studies so much that I often joke that a boy would have to preface marriage proposals with "I just read this study where....". I have friendships that I deeply enjoy that simply rely on pop culture references and making jokes about weird book covers. These are not gut-level relationships. We present our truth-functions, but neither of us emotionally invests in the other's ideas.

Am I being too much of a girl to assume that a person is talking to me because they enjoy it? I think I'd rather someone talked to me simply because they wanted to and not because they felt an obligation or because I make delicious delicious cookies. And even though every scientific bone in my body discourages saying this, I'm going to put it out there: I think everyone is like this.

How many people are so wrapped up in feeling like they are "cool" that they never put ideas out into the world? How many of them go to stand up shows or open mic nights simply to critique and mock the people on stage? Does this self-protection afford happiness?



Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.