Home Philosophy Wittgenstein. Ordinary Language as Lifeform
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Wittgenstein. Ordinary Language as Lifeform

  • Sandra Laugier
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Language, Form(s) of Life, and Logic
This chapter is in the book Language, Form(s) of Life, and Logic

Abstract

The concept of form of life is simultaneously and inseparably overvalued and neglected in Wittgenstein’s work. The author aims to understand the concept of form of life, or lifeform (as Cavell proposes to translate Lebensform), as an alternative to the concept of rules in the exploration of ordinary language. Cavell shows at once the fragility and the depth of our agreements, and he seeks out the nature of the necessities that emerge from our forms of life. Ordinary language philosophy as inherited by Cavell is thus anchored in an attention to language as it is commonly used, as part and milieu of our everyday interactions and conversations. Attention to ordinary language is also attention to neglected realities and to the constant risk of failure of conversation in everyday life. Recognizing the vulnerability of language - excuses, e. g., in their everyday recognition of human vulnerability and tragedy - allows us to recognize the human lifeform as itself vulnerable. Contemporary philosophy often sees recourse to the ordinary, to forms of life (as given), as a too-easy solution to skepticism. But the threat of destruction of forms of life (social and biological) in the present world gives the concept of Lebensform renewed reality and relevance: It is to turn us toward the unending political evaluation of the confrontation between need and rule, and to compare this with Emerson’s recurrence to the collisions of power and form, that I have urged noticing the key ambiguity in Wittgenstein’s concept of a form of life. The concept projects simultaneously, as I take it, an irreducibly horizontal ethnological or conventional axis crossing an irreducibly vertical biological axis,which is in effect to picture human existence as that life form which eternally criticizes itself - as it were from below and from beyond - or incessantly declines to. (Cavell 2010: 108)

Abstract

The concept of form of life is simultaneously and inseparably overvalued and neglected in Wittgenstein’s work. The author aims to understand the concept of form of life, or lifeform (as Cavell proposes to translate Lebensform), as an alternative to the concept of rules in the exploration of ordinary language. Cavell shows at once the fragility and the depth of our agreements, and he seeks out the nature of the necessities that emerge from our forms of life. Ordinary language philosophy as inherited by Cavell is thus anchored in an attention to language as it is commonly used, as part and milieu of our everyday interactions and conversations. Attention to ordinary language is also attention to neglected realities and to the constant risk of failure of conversation in everyday life. Recognizing the vulnerability of language - excuses, e. g., in their everyday recognition of human vulnerability and tragedy - allows us to recognize the human lifeform as itself vulnerable. Contemporary philosophy often sees recourse to the ordinary, to forms of life (as given), as a too-easy solution to skepticism. But the threat of destruction of forms of life (social and biological) in the present world gives the concept of Lebensform renewed reality and relevance: It is to turn us toward the unending political evaluation of the confrontation between need and rule, and to compare this with Emerson’s recurrence to the collisions of power and form, that I have urged noticing the key ambiguity in Wittgenstein’s concept of a form of life. The concept projects simultaneously, as I take it, an irreducibly horizontal ethnological or conventional axis crossing an irreducibly vertical biological axis,which is in effect to picture human existence as that life form which eternally criticizes itself - as it were from below and from beyond - or incessantly declines to. (Cavell 2010: 108)

Downloaded on 2.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110518283-012/html
Scroll to top button