本书旨在为魏斯曼在分析哲学史中所具有的重要性辩护。为此，本书提出三条主线：“中期”维特根斯坦哲学发展延续性的论证是重估魏斯曼哲学重要性的理论背景；对维特根斯坦、魏斯曼和维也纳小组成员互动的考察是对魏斯曼哲学重要性辩护的哲学史背景；魏斯曼对“中期”维特根斯坦具体哲学的阐释与发展是魏斯曼哲学重要性的具体体现。

首先，本书提出从“整体”视角理解维特根斯坦哲学，其论点在于维特根斯坦整个哲学生涯哲学观点的发展是动态延续的。“中期”维特根斯坦哲学延续性的论证有多种路径，其中魏斯曼对“中期”维特根斯坦语言哲学的阐释是本书提出的第三条路径。

其次，魏斯曼在分析哲学史中所遭受的误解和低估，是由于维也纳小组和跟维特根斯坦对话过程中，魏斯曼所处的特殊角色、维特根斯坦和小组成员的争论以及小组“左右”两翼对垒的结果。

第三，本书论证了魏斯曼对分析哲学的两个具体贡献：他对“中期”维特根斯坦有关语言哲学以及元哲学观点的阐释，对于现今阐释者对这些观念的理解有重要参考价值；他对“中期”维特根斯坦哲学的发展体现在“语言层次”观念和元哲学观点。

第四，对魏斯曼有关“中期”维特根斯坦对“假设”和“证实”思考的阐释的考察揭示了维特根斯坦“证实主义阶段”的发展历程；对魏斯曼有关维特根斯坦对“实指定义”阐释的考察澄清了“中期”维特根斯坦语义观点的发展：他从批判心理主义和逻辑主义语义理论开始，接着在《哲学研究》中提出语词的意义在于具体使用的观点，这体现出了维特根斯坦从心理主义和逻辑主义语义理论，到关注语词具体使用的延续性发展。在关注语词具体使用过程时，我们还要考虑到众多非语言因素，这也表明维特根斯坦从询问语词的具体使用到对具体动作的明晰性的考察的过渡。

第五，对魏斯曼有关“中期”维特根斯坦元哲学阐释的研究表明，“中期”维特根斯坦仍坚持认为哲学问题源于语言混淆和误解：他在《逻辑哲学论》时期激烈地指出哲学研究是对日常语言的批判，其核心是语言分析方法；在《大打字稿》中提出了语言分析作为“治疗型”哲学的核心方法论；在《哲学研究》中，他逐渐过渡到以对日常语言的用法为考察焦点的语法研究。

最后，本书基于文本考察，初步回应了学界有关魏斯曼、“中期”维特根斯坦“治疗型”元哲学观点跟精神分析关联的有关争论。

关键词：“中期”维特根斯坦；维也纳小组；魏斯曼；语言哲学；元哲学

Abstract

The present book is a vindication of Friedrich Waismann's significance in the history of analytic philosophy: Waismann's texts can provide the scholars of logi cal empiricismmuch help in re-understanding the development of Vienna Circle and the specific stances of the group members in their conversations and debates with Ludwig Wittgenstein during the 1930s;the philosophi cal interaction between Waismann and Wittgenstein,and Waismann's interpretation of Wittgenstein's thoughts provide us with a different perspective in understanding the“Middle”Wittgenstein.

Three threads are imbedded: the construction of the continuity of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy is the theoreti cal background for re-evaluating Waismann's significance; the investigation of the interaction among Wittgenstein,Waismann and Vienna Circle during the 1930s is the histori cal background for the justification and refutation of Waismann's being neglected and underestimated; Waismann's interpretation and development of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy are the proof of Waismann's significance.The first and last threads are closely interrelated.

First,the author argues that we would investigate Wittgenstein's philosophy from the“holistic”perspective so as to demonstrate Waismann's significance.The“holistic”perspective lies essentially in the point that there is not only a dynamic transformation but a continuous development of Wittgenstein's thought throughout his whole career: there is no essential change in his meta-philosophy,ways of thinking and writing style in different periods.The author regards Tractatus and Philosophi cal Investigations as two“poles”of Wittgenstein's philosophy,taking The Big Typescripts as the representative of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy.The author argues that there are three approaches in constructing the continuity of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy: his critic and giving up of“logi cal atomism”;his transformation of his semantics; Waismann's witness of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy development and his interpretation of“Middle”Wittgenstein's relevant thoughts is the third approach.

Second,Waismann's beingunderestimated and neglected in the analytic philosophy was due to his unique role which he had played in the conversations and interactions between Wittgenstein and Vienna Circle members,it is the consequence of the debates between Wittgenstein and the group members,and the confrontation between the“left”and“right”wings of the Circle during the 1930s.

Third,based on the present investigation,the book shows that Waismann's contribution in analytic philosophy lies in two perspectives:his understanding and interpretation of“Middle”Wittgenstein's thoughts on“hypothesis”and“verification”,the“ostensive definition”and the meta-philosophy can provide the present interpreters new insights and referential value; Moreover,hisd evelopment of“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy is crystalized in“language strata”and his meta-philosophy in his later career.

Fourth,with regard to Waismann's Language Strata,there are five key notions in“language strata”:logic,the completeness in description,open texture,verification and truth.The author argues that“language strata”is deeply influenced and inspired by his interaction with Wittgenstein during the 1930s: it is through Wittgenstein's view on“verification”that Waismann formed that idea step-by-step.

Waismann inherits“Middle”Wittgenstein's following ideas of metaphilosophy:he still insists the method of linguistic analysis in philosophizing;he still believes that philosophi cal problems are philosopher's“intellectual disquiet”,and he suggests that we should take a“survey”perspective in philosophizing;we should change our view from explanation to description.Furthermore,Waismann also criticizes and goes beyond“Middle”Wittgenstein: he does not agree with Wittgenstein completely that philosophi cal problems are dissolved rather than solved; that the meaning of a word lies at its actual use.In contrast,later Waismann believes that the core of philosophizing lies at a deep“insight”of the problem itself; the purpose of linguistic analysis method is to remove the philosopher's disquiet,to change their perspective in looking at philosophi cal problems,it is not merely a pursuit of clarity.The essence of philosophy is freedom.

Fifth,through Waismann's interpretation of“Middle”Wittgenstein's thoughts on“hypothesis”and“verification”,we can have a better understanding of the“verificationism period”in“Middle”Wittgenstein:Wittgenstein's thoughts on“verification”is not only different from logi cal positivism,it also inspires language strata; by investigating Waismann's interpretation of Wittgenstein's view on“ostensive definition”,the booktraces the development of“Middle”Wittgenstein's semantic views:he criticized the mentalism and logicism semantic theories in the Big Typescripts at the very beginning,then he proposed that the meaning of a word lies at its actual use in daily life in the Philosophi cal Investigations,which proves that there is a continuity in“Middle”Wittgenstein's philosophy:he transformed from the mentalistic and logistic semantic theories to the focus of the actual use of language.Wittgenstein's focus on word's actual use is exhibited in his discussion of“ostensive definition”,in which he illustrates many language games.When we are concerned with word's actual use,we should take many non-linguistic elements into consideration,which also demonstrates that Wittgenstein's continuity and transformation from the inquiry of word's actual application to the focus of the clarity of the actual acts of human being's in communicating by their languages.

Finally,there are many differences between Waismann and Wittgenstein regarding to“ostensive definition”; By investigating Waismann's interpretation of“Middle”Wittgenstein's nature of philosophy,the book proves that the“Middle”Wittgenstein still insists that philosophi cal problems arise from philosophers confusion and misunderstanding of ordinary language being applied in expressing the propositions,no matter semanti cally or pragmati cally.In the Tractatelian period,Wittgenstein forcefully points out that philosophi cal investigation is the critic of language,its fundermental approach is linguistic analysis.In Big Typescript,Wittgenstein continually forms the linguistic analysis method with psycho-analysis feature: linguistic analysis is the gist of“therapeutic”philosophy.In the Philosophi cal Investigations,Wittgenstein progressively transforms from the linguistic analysis method with psycho-analysis feature to the grammati cal investigation which taking pragmatics as the essence of philosophi cal investigation.

Key Words:“Middle”Wittgenstein; continuity; Waismann; hypothesis; verification; ostensive definition; Language Strata; meta-phi-losophy