Enzo asked:

Has the language problems discussed by Wittgenstein been resolved as of yet? Is there a future for
analytic philosophy?

============

Well probably this questioner has given up... this was at the bottom of the list. And for good reason...
who could possibly answer whether there is a "future" for analytic philosophy? However,I have a
solution for you! Read This Book: Edmonds, D., and J. Eidinow. Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story of a
Ten-Minute Argument between Two Great Philosophers.New York, NY: Harper Collins, Inc., 2001.
You still won't get an answer, but you'll understand the question a lotbetter!

Steven Ravett Brown

Don't you think that Wittgenstein himself tried to provide resolutions of the problems he raised? Or
was he just a riddler who tried to tie us all up in conceptual knots? (A bit like Socrates, perhaps?)

The simple answer to your question is that in the philosophical world generally there is is still a great
deal of argument about the sort of language problems that W. discussed — and so it would appear
that they are, as yet, unresolved. But some philosophers seem to almost completely ignore what W.
had to say about these things, others do not. Many of these would still regard themselves as analytic
philosophers in some sense or the other ... so perhaps analytic philosophy is alive and well ... but in
some quarters "analytic" philosophy would appear to have been taken in a direction very different to
what W. was doing. And even in W's time there were those (e.g. Carnap) doing very different types of
"analytic" philosophy from what W. was doing... but I would not be too hung-up about labels like
"Analytic"...

What is far more important is that Wittgenstein himself believed that he had resolved (or untangled or
dissolved) many of the problems he discussed — or at least pointed to how they might be resolved/
dissolved. It is not always very clear how this has been achieved, because he doesn't give simple
black and white answers. He believed that that would lead to people not thinking for themselves.

I would suggest the following approach: pick just one specific language problem that Wittgenstein
raised, try to work out WHY its is a problem for him and philosophy generally, consider carefully what
W. has to say about it and whether he has not, explicitly or implicitly provided a resolution/
dis-solution of the problem. Do YOU also feel it to be a problem and does what W. say help you see
any glimmer of a resolution? Try to work from the original W. texts but by all means use secondary
commentators to help you (just bear in mind that there is a fair measure of disagreement between
secondary commentators!)

THEN consider whether more recent philosophers are still haggling about the same problem. If W.
had a solution have the contemporaries missed the point? Or have they found that W's solution was
wrong? Or (a third possibility) have they simply ignored W, having perhaps rejected his philosophy for
other, unrelated, reasons and are now just going their own sweet way, returning to the old problem,
but perhaps with a different approach? If so, surely one or the other is/ was barking up the wrong
tree? Or are their problems really different, only apparently the same?

I would most strongly recommend you take a look at Peter Hacker's book "Wittgenstein and
Twentieth Century Analytic Philosophy" I am sure it will help you find some answers.

Robert de Villiers