Abstract

In this paper I criticize James Conant’s account of the ”austere conception of nonsense”. 1) Conant tells us that no distinctions are made within nonsense, according to the “austere conception of nonsense”. I argue that this is not the case. 2) Conant claims that there can be no fixed answers to whether a remark is nonsensical or not. He also provides a list of remarks that must be understood as meaningful. 3) I argue that it follows from Conant’s account that the success of the philosophical project of the Tractatus depends on the reader undergoing a certain psychological process. It is however crucial for Wittgenstein, according to Conant, to follow Frege in the separation between philosophy and psychology.