On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity

In this paper, I introduce the idea of ‘radical relativity’ to elucidate an undervalued justificatory context for Wittgenstein’s affirmation of radical pluralism. I accept D.Z. Phillips’s definition of radical pluralism as the view that certain radical differences between people’s ordinary practice...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Randy Ramal
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Nordic Wittgenstein Society 2019-03-01
Series:Nordic Wittgenstein Review
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.nordicwittgensteinreview.com/article/view/3461
id doaj-0c9232256c7244e1a26d44c87a7bc11a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-0c9232256c7244e1a26d44c87a7bc11a2020-11-25T00:06:21ZengNordic Wittgenstein SocietyNordic Wittgenstein Review2194-68252242-248X2019-03-018110.15845/nwr.v8i1.3461On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical RelativityRandy Ramal0Claremont Graduate University In this paper, I introduce the idea of ‘radical relativity’ to elucidate an undervalued justificatory context for Wittgenstein’s affirmation of radical pluralism. I accept D.Z. Phillips’s definition of radical pluralism as the view that certain radical differences between people’s ordinary practices prevent the latter from being reduced to a necessary set of common interests, meanings, or truths. I argue that radical relativity provides this form of pluralism with the logical justification it requires in that it accounts for how pluralism became radical. More specifically, I argue that the contingent, non-causal, and yet non-arbitrary relation between ordinary concepts and the pluralistic world through which they emerge explains the reality of radical pluralism. Radical relativity is suggested in Wittgenstein’s three notions of ‘concept formation’, ‘agreement in reaction’, and ‘world pictures’, I argue, without endorsing traditional forms of relativism. Finally, I show that although D.Z. Phillips and Hilary Putnam promote notions of pluralism indebted to Wittgenstein, neither philosopher utilizes the radical relativity suggested in his work to justify his respective version of pluralism or Wittgenstein’s version of radical pluralism. https://www.nordicwittgensteinreview.com/article/view/3461Radical PluralismRadical RelativityD Z PhillipsHilary PutnamConceptual RelativityConceptual Pluralism
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Randy Ramal
spellingShingle Randy Ramal
On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
Nordic Wittgenstein Review
Radical Pluralism
Radical Relativity
D Z Phillips
Hilary Putnam
Conceptual Relativity
Conceptual Pluralism
author_facet Randy Ramal
author_sort Randy Ramal
title On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
title_short On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
title_full On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
title_fullStr On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
title_full_unstemmed On Wittgenstein, Radical Pluralism, and Radical Relativity
title_sort on wittgenstein, radical pluralism, and radical relativity
publisher Nordic Wittgenstein Society
series Nordic Wittgenstein Review
issn 2194-6825
2242-248X
publishDate 2019-03-01
description In this paper, I introduce the idea of ‘radical relativity’ to elucidate an undervalued justificatory context for Wittgenstein’s affirmation of radical pluralism. I accept D.Z. Phillips’s definition of radical pluralism as the view that certain radical differences between people’s ordinary practices prevent the latter from being reduced to a necessary set of common interests, meanings, or truths. I argue that radical relativity provides this form of pluralism with the logical justification it requires in that it accounts for how pluralism became radical. More specifically, I argue that the contingent, non-causal, and yet non-arbitrary relation between ordinary concepts and the pluralistic world through which they emerge explains the reality of radical pluralism. Radical relativity is suggested in Wittgenstein’s three notions of ‘concept formation’, ‘agreement in reaction’, and ‘world pictures’, I argue, without endorsing traditional forms of relativism. Finally, I show that although D.Z. Phillips and Hilary Putnam promote notions of pluralism indebted to Wittgenstein, neither philosopher utilizes the radical relativity suggested in his work to justify his respective version of pluralism or Wittgenstein’s version of radical pluralism.
topic Radical Pluralism
Radical Relativity
D Z Phillips
Hilary Putnam
Conceptual Relativity
Conceptual Pluralism
url https://www.nordicwittgensteinreview.com/article/view/3461
work_keys_str_mv AT randyramal onwittgensteinradicalpluralismandradicalrelativity
_version_ 1725422566438338560