5,225
edits
Project:Why are some of Wittgenstein’s texts missing from this website?: Difference between revisions
Project:Why are some of Wittgenstein’s texts missing from this website? (view source)
Revision as of 14:18, 16 July 2022
, 1 year agono edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
What Wittgenstein’s literary executors—or, more broadly, his editors—did in order to prepare the publication of such texts as ''On Certainty'', the ''Remarks on Colour'', ''Zettel'', ''Philosophical Grammar'', ''Culture and Value'', and others, was a combination of selecting, grouping, and sorting. The rendering of individual sentences has always been word-by-word, except for trivial corrections of spelling and punctuation. Lacking an objective criterion, it is very difficult to determine the extent to which this kind of activity can be considered creative. | What Wittgenstein’s literary executors—or, more broadly, his editors—did in order to prepare the publication of such texts as ''On Certainty'', the ''Remarks on Colour'', ''Zettel'', ''Philosophical Grammar'', ''Culture and Value'', and others, was a combination of selecting, grouping, and sorting. The rendering of individual sentences has always been word-by-word, except for trivial corrections of spelling and punctuation. Lacking an objective criterion, it is very difficult to determine the extent to which this kind of activity can be considered creative. | ||
Based on our expertise in the field of copyright, we at the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project decided to only publish those texts for which we had strong reasons to determine that the editor’s work can ''not'' be considered creative. A case-by-case analysis is beyond the scope of this short essay, but it can be useful to provide an example. In | Based on our expertise in the field of copyright, we at the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project decided to only publish those texts for which we had strong reasons to determine that the editor’s work can ''not'' be considered creative. A case-by-case analysis is beyond the scope of this short essay, but it can be useful to provide an example. In the introduction to their edition of ''On Certainty'', G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. von Wright write: “What we publish here belongs to the last year and a half of Wittgenstein's life. […] It seemed appropriate to publish this work by itself. It is not a selection; Wittgenstein marked it off in his notebooks as a separate topic, which he apparently took up at four separate periods during this eighteen months. It constitutes a single sustained treatment of the topic.”<ref>Anscombe, G.E.M. and von Wright, G.H. (1972). Preface. ''On Certainty''. By Wittgenstein, L. New York: Harper & Row, p. vie.</ref> We consider this more than sufficient for determining the non-creative nature of Anscombe and von Wright’s work of collating the notes that make up the book. | ||
In other cases, the editors’ work of selecting and organising Wittgenstein’s remarks was not aided by any suggestion of Wittgenstein’s own. For as difficult as it may be to draw any conclusions, we think that this might be enough for someone to make claims similar to the one the Anne Frank Fonds made in 2015. In such cases, we decided not to publish the texts until we achieve a greater degree of certainty on the matter. | In other cases, the editors’ work of selecting and organising Wittgenstein’s remarks was not aided by any suggestion of Wittgenstein’s own. For as difficult as it may be to draw any conclusions, we think that this might be enough for someone to make claims similar to the one the Anne Frank Fonds made in 2015. In such cases, we decided not to publish the texts until we achieve a greater degree of certainty on the matter. | ||