Abstract
This paper compares the treatment of private sensations in the works of Wittgenstein and Klossowski. Its aim is to show that, despite the differences between their traditions and methods, they align in at least one important respect: rejecting relations of reference between signs and private sensations. The paper briefly contextualises their lines of attack on these relations, situating the two thinkers’ commonalities amidst what are undeniably divergent wider purposes. It proceeds to argue for two more specific conclusions. Firstly, Klossowski’s own rejoinder directed at reference to private sensations is rooted in his comparison of linguistic meaning to economic valuation in Living Currency. Secondly, Klossowski goes beyond Wittgenstein in arguing that, regardless of the status of reference of this sort, no complete account of sensation can view it only as private.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Smith (2017. pp. 1–28).
Smith (2017, pp. 1–2).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 2e).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. x).
Helgeson (2011, p. 338).
Helgeson (2011, p. 338).
Grondin (2010, p. 363).
Dastur (2010, p. 320).
McGuiness (2009, p. 24).
Rigal (1961, p. 2).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 10e).
Pitcher (1964, p. 190).
Stern (2013, p. 180).
Smith (1997, p. xi).
Klossowski (1997, p. 15).
Klossowski (1997. p. 99).
Klossowski (1997, p. xviii).
Tremblay (2012, p. 9).
Tremblay (2012, p. 10).
Klossowski (1997, p. 80).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 95).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 93).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 95).
The scope of this assertion would exclude the early Wittgenstein.
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 89e).
Stroud (2000, p. 69).
Pitcher (1964, p. 283).
Pitcher (1964, p. 282).
Temkin (1981, p. 97).
I am very grateful to Ian James for drawing my attention to these resonances in the interpretation of Wittgenstein, as well as more general comments on this essay.
Wittgenstein (1968, p. 277).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 76e).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 76e).
Gustafson (1968, p. 143).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 76e).
Murphy (1968. p. 62).
Bouveresse (1987, p. 52).
Peacocke (1982, pp. 162–170).
Foot (1983. p. 189).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 76e).
Temkin (1981, p. 106).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 96).
Wittgenstein (1968, p. 314).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 279).
Wittgenstein (1981, p. 279).
Wittgenstein (1968, p. 292).
Pitcher (1964, p. 281).
Candlish and Wrisley (2014).
Hacker (1990, p. 3).
Klossowski (2017, p. 73).
Klossowski (2017, p. 47).
Klossowski (2017, p. 51).
Klossowski (2017, p. 68).
Klossowski (1997, pp. 47, 51–52, 60, 63).
Klossowski (1997, p. 48).
Klossowski (2017, p. 68).
Klossowski (2017, p. 47).
Klossowski (2017, p. 67).
Veblen (1912, p. 48).
Smith (2017, p. 21).
Bataille (1997, pp. 167–168).
Klossowski and Bataille here echo elements of the Marxian perspective on utility. In The German Ideology, Marx (1) asserts the irreducibility of certain desires to more fundamental ones, at least as far as the utilitarian reduction is concerned, and (2) denies that said desires, however they may or may not be reduced, are independent of economic factors. “All the activity of individuals in their mutual intercourse, e.g. speech, love, etc., is depicted as a relation of utility and utilisation. Hence the actual relations that are presupposed here are speech, love, the definite manifestations of definite qualities of individuals. Now these relations are supposed not to have the meaning peculiar to them but to be the expression and manifestation of some third relation introduced in their place, the relation of utility or utilisation”.
Klossowski (1997, p. 42).
Klossowski (1997, p. 26).
Klossowski (1997, pp. 43, 138, 260).
Klossowski (1997, p. 68).
Klossowski does not debar all relations between these terms, lest trivial relations be raised as counter-examples.
Pitcher (1964, p. 281).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 75e).
Wittgenstein (1968, pp. 276, 279, 280).
Klossowski (1997, p. 34).
Wittgenstein (1968, p. 275).
Klossowski (2017, p. 47).
Klossowski (2017, pp. 75–76).
Bataille (1997, pp. 167–168).
Clinton (2017).
Living Currency equivocates between living objects of sensation (an entire body or person) and sensations themselves, but other texts such as Sade My Neighbour provide ample evidence that the characteristics predicated here of the former apply equally to the latter. This paper assumes, therefore, that there is no material difference between occurrences of “living objects of sensation” and “sensation” in the former text. .
Smith (1997, pp. ix–x).
Wittgenstein (2001, p. 75e).
Klossowski (1991, p. 36).
Klossowski (2017, p. 51).
Klossowski (2017, p. 68)
Klossowski (2017, p. 88).
James and Ford (2005, p. 4).
Klossowski (2017, p. 94).
Dastur (2010, p. 319).
Dastur (2010, p. 319).
Klossowski (1997, p. 79).
Klossowski (1997, p. 36).
Klossowski (1991, p. 120).
Klossowski (1997, p. 34).
References
Bataille G (1997) The notion of expenditure. In: Botting F, Wilson S (eds) The Bataille Reade. Blackwell, Oxford
Bouveresse J (1987) Le Mythe de L’Intériorité. Les Éditions de Minuit, Paris
Candlish S, Wrisley G (2014) Private Language. In: Zalta E (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/private-language
Clinton P (2017) Illicit trade. https://frieze.com/article/illicit-trade
Dastur F (2010) Langage et Métaphysique chez Heidegger et chez Wittgenstein. Les Études Philsophiques 3:319–331
Foot P (1983) Peacocke on Wittgenstein and experience. Philos Q 33(131):187–191
Grondin V (2010) La Préhistoire du Sens. Les Limits du Dualisme de la Grammaire et de l’Histoire Chez Wittgenstein. Les Études Philsophiques 3:373–375
Gustafson D (1968) A note on a misreading of Wittgenstein. Analysis 28(4):143–144
Hacker P (1990) Wittgenstein, meaning and mind: an analytical commentary on the philosophical investigations, vol 3. Blackwell, Oxford
Helgeson J (2011) What cannot be said: notes on early French Wittgenstein reception. Paragraph 34(3):338–357
James I, Ford R (2005) Introduction: whispers of the flesh: essays in memory of Pierre Klossowski. Diacritics 35(1):2–7
Klossowski P (1991) Sade my neighbour. Translated by A. Lingis. Northwestern University Press, Illinois
Klossowski P (1997) Nietzsche and the vicious circle. Translated by D. Smith. Athlone, London
Klossowski P (2017) Living currency. Translated by V. Cisney, N. Morar and D. Smith. Bloomsbury, London
McGuiness B (2009) Peu Importe qui Gagne Aprés ce sera Terrible. Cités 38:13–24
Murphy J (1968) Another note on a misreading of Wittgenstein. Analysis 29(2):62–64
Pitcher G (1964) The philosophy of Wittgenstein. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River
Rigal É (1961) “Avant-propos.” In: Wittgenstein L. Recherches Philosophiques. Translated by F. Dastur et al. Gallimard, Paris, pp 2–9
Smith D (1997) Translator’s preface. In: Klossowski P (ed) Nietzsche and the vicious circle. Athlone, London
Smith D (2017) Pierre Klossowski: from theatrical theology to counter-Utopia. In: Living currency. Translated by V. Cisney, N. Morar and D. Smith. Bloomsbury, London
Stern D (2013) Another strand in the private language argument. In: Ahmed A (ed) Wittgenstein’s ‘philosophical investigations’ a critical guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Stroud B (2000) Meaning, understanding and practice: philosophical essays. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Temkin J (1981) Wittgenstein on epistemic privacy. Philos Q 31(123):97–109
Tremblay T (2012) Anamnèses: Essai Sur L’Oeuvre de Pierre Klossowski. Hermann, Paris
Veblen T (1912) The theory of the leisure class. B.W. Huebsch, New York
Wittgenstein L (1968) Notes for lectures on “Private experience” and “Sense data”. Philos Rev 77(3):275–320
Wittgenstein L (1981) Zettel, 2nd ed. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Blackwell, Oxford
Wittgenstein L (2001) Philosophical investigations, 3rd ed. Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe. Blackwell, Oxford
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Husbands, C. Klossowski and Wittgenstein on Sensation and Privacy. Axiomathes 31, 529–548 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-020-09492-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-020-09492-w