| Summary: | ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to show that "traditional" and "resolute" interpretations have not freed the "Tractatus" from the apparent paradoxical self-defeat. I argue that these readings only give it new clothing. Hacker's "traditional" reading ends up ascribing a metaphysical conspiracy to the "Tractatus", which is incompatible with the aims of the book. The "resolute" reading of Diamond and Conant ascribes an authorial conspiracy to Wittgenstein, which contradicts his views on authorship and method. Grounded in the difficulties found in both sides of the current debate, I conclude this paper by proposing several requirements that the correct interpretation of the "Tractatus" should fulfill.
|
|---|