Why isn’t Wittgenstein studied more at the undergraduate level!?
I’m not sure, really. Possible explanations are that most people who are experts in Wittgenstein’s philosophy seem to be concerned with Wittgenstein’s work and not much else (in the way of philosophy). I was told that by one of my philosophy professors. Another explanation is that there probably aren’t many experts on Wittgenstein in general; there’s no standard of interpretation regarding his views. Of course, most philosophers (or anyone, really) fail to be as consistent with the paradigms we assign them as we think they are, but Wittgenstein’s later work (in particular) just doesn’t bode well for a college philosophy professor trying to get their students to understand the distinction between soundness and validity. What I mean to say is that his later work flies in the face of the analytic discourse in philosophy. At the least, it’s irrelevant for the major purposes of the curriculum. His earlier work is perfect for a student of analytic philosophy, but it’s extremely dense and the
