Skip to main content
Log in

From Solipsism to the Limits of Experience: A Reflection in the Light of Wittgenstein’s TLP

  • Published:
Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we will discuss solipsism and the limits of experience in the light of Wittgenstein’s TLP. One cannot draw the limits of experience without bringing in the notion of the experiencer. That is to say, the notion of self is very relevant to the discussion on the limits of experience. Solipsism means that ‘I’ is the only reality, and what I experience is all that I could know. We will focus on solipsism from two points of view, the empirical point of view and the transcendental point of view. The empirical approach to solipsism makes the self as a matter of its experience. However, from the transcendental point of view, the transcendental or metaphysical self becomes the transcendental ground of our experiences. In the second section, we will discuss the relationship between solipsism and realism. Then how the self is related to the world will be discussed in the third section. For Wittgenstein, the self ‘I' is neither causally nor logically related to the world. This self is the metaphysical subject, and it is the limit of the world. In the fourth section, we will discuss the importance of the limit-self. The limit-self is not the matter or object of experience; rather, it is the ground of our world's experience. For Wittgenstein, it is not an item of the world; rather, it is the limit of the world. The limit-self cannot be described in language, and thus it is beyond our language. It is the limit of our language and also the limit of the world. Then, we will critically analyze the limit of experience, and the metaphysical self is placed on the limit of experience. This self is the non-solipsistic self.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Notes

  1. Schopenhauer (1883, p. 25).

  2. Wittgenstein (1961a, Remarks 5.621).

  3. Schopenhauer (1883, p. 26).

  4. Schroeder (2012, pp. 367–384).

  5. Māndukya Upaniśhad (2020).

  6. Nath (2017).

  7. Schopenhauer (1969, p. 110).

  8. Pathak (2017).

  9. Pradhan (2017).

  10. Indich (1980, pp. 29–35).

  11. Gupta (2003).

  12. Schroeder (2006, pp. 92–99).

  13. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 4.12).

  14. Ibid., Remarks 5.5561.

  15. Ibid., Remarks 5.5423.

  16. Ibid., Remarks 5.6.

  17. Ibid., Remarks 5.62.

  18. Ibid., Remarks 5.641.

  19. Ibid., Remarks 5.631.

  20. Ibid., Remarks 5.633.

  21. Ibid., Remarks 5.632.

  22. Ibid., Remarks 5.5521.

  23. Ibid., Remarks 1.1.

  24. Ibid., Remarks 5.5561.

  25. Ibid., Remarks 5.61.

  26. Ibid.

  27. Pradhan (2002, p. 309).

  28. Ibid., p. 300.

  29. Pradhan (2009, pp. 149–166).

  30. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 5.641).

  31. Ibid., Remarks 5.631.

  32. Chandra (2002, p. 80).

  33. Wittgenstein (1982, p. 80).

  34. Wittgenstein (1975a, Remarks 54).

  35. Wittgenstein (1975b, p. 59).

  36. Ibid., pp. 59–60.

  37. See, Findly (1984, pp. 122–124).

  38. Wittgenstein (1975a, Remarks 54).

  39. Putnam (2012, pp. 339–354).

  40. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 5.64).

  41. Ibid., Remarks 5.621.

  42. Wittgenstein (1958, Sections: 398).

  43. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 5.64).

  44. Chandra (2002, p. 66).

  45. Hume (1978, p. 252).

  46. Hacker (1972, p. 59).

  47. Hume (1978, p. 252).

  48. Wittgenstein (1961b, p. 80).

  49. Swann (1992).

  50. Pears (1987, p. 172).

  51. Pears (1972).

  52. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 6.423).

  53. Ibid., Remarks 5.641.

  54. Ibid., Remarks 5.552.

  55. Stephenson (2009, p. 123).

  56. Ibid., p.123.

  57. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 5.634).

  58. Stephenson (2009, p. 123).

  59. Wittgenstein (1961, Remarks 5.6).

  60. Martland (1975).

  61. Wittgenstein (1958, Sections: 256–257).

  62. Panda and Nath (2020).

  63. Wittgenstein (1982, p. 22).

  64. Ibid., p. 21.

  65. Vohra (2014, pp. 35–62).

  66. Wittgenstein (1982, p. 22).

  67. Wittgenstein (1975b, p. 59).

  68. Wittgenstein (1958, Sections: 398).

  69. Chandra (2002, p. 78).

  70. Hintikka (1958, p. 89).

  71. Wittgenstein (1958, Sects. 253).

  72. Hacker (1972, p. 189).

  73. Wittgenstein (1975b, p. 55).

References

  • Chandra, S. (2002). Wittgenstein: New perspectives. New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findlay, J. N. (1984). Wittgenstein: A critique. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, B. (2003). CIT: Consciousness. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, P. M. S. (1972). Insight and Illusion: Wittgenstein on philosophy and the metaphysics of experience. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hintikka, J. (1958). On Wittgenstein’s ‘Solipsism’. Mind, 67(265), 88–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D. (1978). In L. A. Selby-Bigge (Ed.), A treatise of human nature. Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Indich, W. M. (1980). Consciousness. In: Advaita Vedānta. Motilal Banarsidas.

  • Martland, T. R. (1975). On ‘The Limits of My Language mean the Limits of My World.’ The Review of Metaphysics, 29(1), 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nath, R. (2017). Can naturalism explain consciousness: A critique. Artificial Intelligence and Society, 32(4), 563–571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-016-0671-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panda, M. M., & Nath, R. (2020). Wittgenstein on public language about personal experiences. Philosophia, 48(5), 1939–1960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11406-020-00192-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pathak, K. M. (2017). The quintessence of the Upanishadic wisdom and the solace of Schopenhauer’s life. In A. Barua (Ed.), Schopenhauer on self, world and morality: Vedantic and non-vedantic perspectives (pp. 59–68). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pears, D. (1972). Wittgenstein’s treatment of solipsism in the Tractatus. Crítica: Revista Hispanoamericana De Filosofía, 6(16/17), 57–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pears, D. (1987). The false prison: A study of the development of Wittgenstein’s philosophy (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, R. C. (2002). The great mirror: An essay on Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. Kalki Prakash.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, R. C. (2009). Language, reality and transcendence. BrownWalker Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradhan, R. C. (2017). Self, world, and morality: Schopenhauer, Wittgenstein, and Vedanta. In A. Barua (Ed.), Schopenhauer on self, world and morality: Vedantic and non-vedantic perspectives (pp. 21–33). Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, H. (2012). Wittgenstein and realism. In M. De Caro & D. Macarthur (Eds.), Philosophy in an age of Science (pp. 339–354). Harvard University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Schopenhauer, A. (1883) The world as will and idea. 3 Volumes, R. B. Haldane and J. Kemp (Trans.). Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.

  • Schopenhauer, A. (1969). The world as will and representation. Volumes: I and II., E. F. J. Payne (Trans.). Dover Publications, Inc.

  • Schroeder, S. (2006). Wittgenstein: The Way Out of the Fly-Bottle. Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, S. (2012). Schopenhauer’s Influence on Wittgenstein. In B. Vandenabeele (Ed.), A companion to Schopenhauer (pp. 367–384). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson, A. (2009). Two studies in Wittgenstein’s Subject: A) Solipsism and Realism; B) Ordinary Language and Pain. Pli: the Warwick Journal of Philosophy, 20, 111–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swann, P. (1992). Cognitive science and Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. AI Communications, 5(2), 62–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Māndukya Upaniśhad, 1–12 https://www.wisdomlib.org/hinduism/book/mandukya-upanishad-karika-bhashya Accessed on August 20, 2020.

  • Vohra, A. (2014). Wittgenstein’s philosophy of mind. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations. G. E. M. Anscombe (Trans.). Basil Blackwell.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1961a). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. D. F. Pears & B. F. McGuiness (Trans.). Routledge and Kegan Paul.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1961b). Notebooks 1914–16, G. E. M. Anscombe and G. H. Von Wright (Eds.), G. E. M. Anscombe (Trans.). Basil Blackwell.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1975a) Philosophical remarks. Rush Rhees (Ed.), R. Hargreaves & R. White (trans.). Basil Blackwell.

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1975b). The blue and brown books. Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1982). In D. Lee (Ed.), Wittgenstein’s lectures: Cambridge, 1930–32. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

No funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajakishore Nath.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nath, R., Panda, M.M. From Solipsism to the Limits of Experience: A Reflection in the Light of Wittgenstein’s TLP. J. Indian Counc. Philos. Res. 41, 17–36 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-023-00318-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40961-023-00318-9

Keywords

Navigation