Ludwig Wittgenstein Misused Language

Ludwig Wittgenstein’s reading explores the misused expression of truly “knowing” and how knowing or not knowing can merely be “a logical insight” (Wittgenstein 9). Wittgenstein continues to discuss the exceptionally important mental state that is disclosed through this tainted term. However, instead of using the misused term “I know”, we should use “I thought I knew”. Within this “language game”, Wittgenstein describes one of the fundamental features, which is being satisfied. An individual will for the most part, agree with the most satisfying statement. However this text does point out that this is all based on what the individual choses to be a “determinant”. Evidently, not all of mankind will have the same determinants since everyone is …show more content…
Is there even a chance that they actually know? An analogy that Wittgenstein and Moore use is the hand analogy. Wittgenstein explains that saying “there is a hand there’ follows from the proposition ‘he knows that there’s a hand there’. But from his utterance ‘I know…’ it does not follow that he does know it” (14). This very confusing yet intelligible statement opens minds to the fact that though someone may not distinctly say that they know something, their statement that implies that they know that something cannot be proven unless shown. Therefore in this case, saying that “there is a hand there” proposes that that individual knows there is a hand there, yet “that he does know takes some shewing [showing]” (Wittgenstein 14). Anything as far as a simple sensation should not be considered from of a hand existing. Sensations can be easily confused, for instance phantom limb pain. Consequently, sensations cannot be relied upon to prove the existence of an object. The statement “I know” entails that one has fundamental grounds of knowledge to base their statement from, excluding sensations and other body