Linguistic turn in philosophy: a critical analysis

Abstract

The concept of linguistic turn is investigated in the article. Author distinguishes the following types of its interpretation: methodological, formalistic, gradual and holistic. P. F. Strawson's ideas that gave G. Bergmann the reason to use the term "linguistic turn" for the first time in the history of philosophy are under analysis. It has been proved that applying of the methodology of linguistic analysis to the realm of metaphysics was the decisive factor of linguistic turn taking place in analytic philosophy. The term became widely known due to R. Rorty at a time when linguistic philosophy was in a process of active developmpent. Criticism of R. Rorty's position by P. M. S. Hacker and, in general, the changes in understanding of linguistic turn in the history of analytic philosophy are considered. Particular attention is paid to the position of M. Dummett, who argued that linguistic turn was the result of G. Frege's and L. Wittgenstein's intelectual efforts. Analyzing the features of the gradual approach proposed by T. Williamson, author emphasizes his idea that linguistic turn in analytic philosophy is only the first phase of more fundamental turn, namely representational one, which includes a turn to the analysis of consciousness. However, the author justifies a holistic view of the concept of linguistic turn, which is an alternative to analytic approaches. This view makes it possible to better understand why the problem of language has become important not only for analytical philosophy, but also for continental philosophy and even the humanities.