*****************************************************************
*                                                               *

        Titel: A preface to the section "A Review of Chomskys
               Criticism of Kripkes Wittgenstein
        Autor: Frank Börncke, Passau
    Dateiname: 09-2-96.TXT
   Dateilänge: 6 KB

Erschienen in: Wittgenstein Studies 2/96, Datei: 09-2-96.TXT;
hrsg. von K.-O. Apel, N. Garver, B. McGuinness, P. Hacker,
R. Haller, W. Lütterfelds, G. Meggle, C. Nyíri, K. Puhl,
R. Raatzsch, T. Rentsch, J.G.F. Rothhaupt, J. Schulte,
U. Steinvorth, P. Stekeler-Weithofer, W. Vossenkuhl,
(3 1/2'' Diskette) ISSN 0943-5727.

*                                                               *
*****************************************************************
*                                                               *
*    (c) 1996 Deutsche Ludwig Wittgenstein Gesellschaft e.V.    *
*        Alle Rechte vorbehalten / All Rights Reserved          *
*                                                               *
*    Kein Bestandteil dieser Datei darf ganz oder teilweise     *
*    vervielfältigt, in einem Abfragesystem gespeichert,        *
*    gesendet oder in irgendeine Sprache übersetzt werden in    *
*    irgendeiner Form, sei es auf elektronische, mechanische,   *
*    magnetische, optische, handschriftliche oder andere Art    *
*    und Weise, ohne vorhergehende schriftliche Zustimmung      *
*    der DEUTSCHEN LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN GESELLSCHAFT e.V.        *
*    Dateien und Auszüge, die der Benutzer für                  *
*    seine privaten wissenschaftlichen Zwecke benutzt, sind     *
*    von dieser Regelung ausgenommen.                           *
*                                                               *
*    No part of this file may be reproduced, stored             *
*    in a retrieval system, transmitted or translated into      *
*    any other language in whole or in part, in any form or     *
*    by any means, whether it be in electronical, mechanical,   *
*    magnetic, optical, manual or otherwise, without prior      *
*    written consent of the DEUTSCHE LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN        *
*    GESELLSCHAFT e.V. Those articles and excerpts from         *
*    articles which the subscriber wishes to use for his own    *
*    private academic purposes are excluded from this           *
*    restrictions.                                              *
*                                                               *
*****************************************************************

The   forthcoming sequence of  six   articles    is kind of    an
experiment.  In our  recent issues  we published single  articles
only or sets of  articles by different  authors dealing with  the
same  topic.  As WITTGENSTEIN STUDIES are   published two times a
year only,  this doesn't allow  to document an immediate feedback
from other readers. This seems to  be an unsatisfactory situation
as we believe engaged(?)  discussions to be  an essential part of
the evolution  of both philosophic  positions  and ideas too. The
opportunity to express article related positions (containing both
agreement  and  disagreement)  using  the technique   of  writing
letters to the  editor might help a bit  here but won't solve the
whole problem. Reactions like  this will never  look like  a real
discussion  to the  reader, as  the   break  between  thesis  and
antithesis takes  much to long.  In  that case article and letter
seem to be single  contributions instead, although their contents
might contain a strong connection.

Therefore we'd  like    to experiment with  different   kinds  of
presenting our authors' thoughts  to give them a  more discussion
like style. This time we let the discussion take place as a whole
and show the evolution of thoughts not only presenting the result
in a concluding article but  publishing the first statements  too
that lead to some final points of view.  To be more concrete: The
forthcoming six articles do  develop and clearify their positions
in  turns refering  to each  others points  of criticism starting
with a  detailed  analysis of  Kenny  Siu Sing  Huen.   The final
position is summarized by Daniel Barbiereo.

The title of this section: "Chomsky and  Kripke s Wittgenstein on
Rule Following" gives  a first impression  of what the  debate is
about.  As the amercian linguist Noam Chomsky formulated a lot of
ideas concerning the way the concept of language is representated
in  our mind,  this leads directly  to  a list  of questions, how
these positions do  behave compared to Wittgensteinian ideas.  To
concentrate on  a certain topic Huen and  Barbiero refer  to Saul
Kripkes interpretation of the notion of rule following.

This discussion takes place in six steps namely: 

(1) A Review of Chomskys Criticism of Kripkes Wittgenstein (Huen) 

(2) Chomsky vs. Kripke round 2: Methodological Collectivism and
    Explanatory Adequacy (Barbiero) 

(3) Huens response 

(4) Barbieros Reply 

(5) Further remarks from Huen 

(6) Concluding remarks from Barbiero 

There is  no need to stop  with the  6th contribution.  The given
list of articles published in this  issue of WITTGENSTEIN STUDIES
may be extended by third  party authors.  Therefore feel free  to
send us your own  position.  Furthermore this experiment might be
a suggestion for  groups of readers  to gather together and share
their views  concerning  another topic out  of the  philosophy of
Wittgenstein.  If you  are looking for   contacts to form such  a
group you may find it useful to have a look at the 'forum' at our
internet pages.