10 pages due May 14th.
We have read a number of pieces by or about Wittgenstein – especially as regards religion. And as we’ve seen, although earlier and later Wittgenstein proffers distinct accounts (of language and so) of the nature and place of religion and religious belief, arguably there is continuity across the two, at least with respect to what he, Wittgenstein, stands against (a stand perhaps reminiscent of strains in Pascal & Kierkegaard). But if we can get clear about that, at least two further matters remain to be argued for. First, does Witt’s negative stand (say, against the likes of a Humean conception of religion) prove compelling? And second, does his positive account of religion (i.e., what it is and how it should be met) bear scrutiny (insofar as it claims immunity from criticism or is guilty of reductionism, linguistic or psychological)? Much will depend on what one thinks of Witt’s quietism, of his notion of nonsense, of his conception of language games and forms of life, as well his idea of the groundlessness of knowledge and belief, and how these show up against criticisms by the likes of Nielson and Hyman. In a long or short essay, motivate and critique to what extent (if any) the Wittgensteinian position is viable.
I will upload other information although the book we used is The Wittgenstein reader by Anthony Kenny. Please provide a strong thesis and a strong paper. I must get an A paper

 
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get a Discount!