Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/12889
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorArthur, Richarden_US
dc.contributor.advisorGriffin, Nicken_US
dc.contributor.advisorLapointe, Sandraen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcQuaid, Colinen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-18T17:01:04Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-18T17:01:04Z-
dc.date.created2013-03-27en_US
dc.date.issued2013-04en_US
dc.identifier.otheropendissertations/7737en_US
dc.identifier.other8795en_US
dc.identifier.other3961825en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/12889-
dc.description.abstract<p>In this thesis I examine the concept of certainty in the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein, with a focus on the collection of remarks entitled <em>On Certainty.</em> In the first part I examine two essays of G.E. Moore that initiated Wittgenstein’s discussion of certainty and critique of Moore’s two essays. As I show, Wittgenstein believes that Moore misunderstood the use of the expression of I know in relation to the propositions of common sense. Instead, Wittgenstein believes that the common sense propositions stand for a certainty that belongs to the language-game itself, a certainty that stands fast for everyone who participates in the language-game, like hinges on which the rest of our knowledge and doubt turn. The rest of my thesis is spent examining three different interpretations of this notion of hinge certainty. The first is hinges as presuppositions to combat skeptical arguments, offered by the philosophers Crispin Wright and H.J. Glock. The second is that hinges are Wittgenstein’s version of foundationalism, serving as the foundational framework of human language, a notion primarily advocated by the philosophers Avrum Stroll and Danièle Moyal-Sharrock. I then examine the interpretation of hinges as learned norms of judging and acting that we must display certainty in if we are to learn a language. This is the interpretation of Rush Rhees and Meredith Williams, and is the position that I support. Finally, I show that contrary to some the remarks in <em>On Certainty </em>express a unified theme, rather than a series of disjointed and contradictory ideas.</p>en_US
dc.subjectWittgensteinen_US
dc.subjectCertaintyen_US
dc.subjectHingesen_US
dc.subjectNormsen_US
dc.subjectAgreementen_US
dc.subjectKnowledgeen_US
dc.subjectFoundationalismen_US
dc.subjectLearningen_US
dc.subjectArts and Humanitiesen_US
dc.subjectArts and Humanitiesen_US
dc.titleThe Nature of Certainty in Wittgenstein's On Certaintyen_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Philosophy (MA)en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
fulltext.pdf
Open Access
735.63 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue