What is it about?
Common-sense, in a nutshell, is that basic level of practical judgment and reasoning about everyday matters that most people are expected to have. It's the kind of understanding that seems obvious and doesn't need much explanation. Peirce claims common-sense is acritical, in the sense it passes without a doubt, but can be criticized if occasion arises. Wittgenstein on the other hand claims it makes no sense to criticize the certainties of common-sense, the function thereof is to underpin our assumed beliefs.
Featured Image
Photo by Jen Theodore on Unsplash
Why is it important?
While common sense is not a substitute for specialized knowledge or critical thinking, it forms a crucial foundation for navigating the world effectively and interacting with others successfully. Common sense forms the bedrock of practical wisdom that allows for our decisions in social life. Both Peirce and Wittgenstein share this basic understanding about common sense, differing though in which aspects of it can be criticized, as well as for what reasons and how.
Perspectives
I hope this article throws some light not only on Peirce's and Wittgenstein's philosophies, but also on the subject that metaphilosophical assumptions do not constitute an unsurmountable obstacle for two thinkers to share the like philosophical beliefs. In other words, different ontological commitments may not be as an unbridgeable obstacle as can be thought. In fact, my suspicion, which I do not think is really original, is that different commitments can be understood in terms of different aims each philosopher has in view. This may seem a truism, but grasping how it works for different systems is nonetheless, in my view, philosophically inspiring.
Cassiano Terra Rodrigues
Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Common-Sense In between Wittgenstein and Peirce, March 2025, De Gruyter,
DOI: 10.1163/9789004708723_008.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
