Book · 1921
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
by Ludwig Wittgenstein
A philosopher publishes seven numbered propositions about the limits of language, then spends the rest of his career arguing he got it wrong.
What does Reddit think of Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus?
r/askphilosophy treats the Tractatus as a coordinate system. Comments cite specific propositions, 6.44, 6.52, 6.521, 6.522, 6.53, the way lawyers cite case numbers, arguing over what "how the world is" versus "that it is" actually means (↑149). The recurring plot point across both subs is Wittgenstein's own reversal: one comment credits the book with reshaping analytic philosophy and inspiring the Logical Positivists, then notes he came back to Cambridge and rejected his own doctrines outright (↑148). That reversal gets treated as settled biography, not live controversy. r/askphilosophy's most practical advice is blunter (↑95): read a secondary source first, since the Tractatus lands on the same difficult-writers list as Nietzsche and Heidegger, better approached with help than cold. r/philosophy's angle is narrower, fixed on the "whereof one cannot speak" line and what it does or doesn't say about God. Nobody here calls it fun.
Community feedback & reader fit
Themes
- · Numbered propositions cited like case law
- · Wittgenstein rejecting his own book later in life
- · The limits of language and what can't be said
- · Secondary literature as the recommended way in
Common praise
- + r/askphilosophy's citation habit (6.44, 6.52, 6.521, 6.522, 6.53) treats the numbered propositions as directly quotable, not just summarized.
- + One comment (↑148) explains exactly how the book reshaped analytic philosophy and fed the Logical Positivists before Wittgenstein turned on it.
- + The Kant comparison (↑111) places the book's "revolution" alongside Rawls' A Theory of Justice as one of a handful of real disciplinary turns in philosophy.
Common criticism
- − r/askphilosophy's own advice (↑95) is to read about Wittgenstein before reading him, which undercuts any claim that the book stands alone for a first-time reader.
- − Every excerpt in this sample debates propositions and biography; whether the read is worth the difficulty doesn't get argued outright here.
- − r/Stoicism's single mention barely engages with the text, so its reach outside academic philosophy spaces is thin in this data.
Who it's for
Enjoy an argument that hinges on a decimal point? r/askphilosophy's regulars debate 6.44 against 6.52 like it's statute, and that's the register this book rewards. Go in cold at your own risk: the subreddit's own top advice is to read a secondary source on Wittgenstein first, the same way you'd want a guide before Heidegger. Expect whiplash almost by design, since the man who wrote it later disowned it at Cambridge and wrote Philosophical Investigations to argue with his younger self. Looking for something that resolves neatly? Nobody quoted here claims it does.
Mentions over time
Top subreddits
Which Reddit comments matter for Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus?
The most relevant excerpts across the subreddits where this book is mentioned — opinionated, argued takes first, then top-upvoted mentions. Click through to read the full thread.
“It seems clear from Wittgenstein's personal life that he did believe in God, just that he didn't believe ~~in~~ there could ever be a philosophical/rational explanation for that personal belief. Any such attempt on these grounds would be pointless even. When he writes in the Tractatus, "whereof on…
“So that's 6.44 in the *Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus*. I interpret this statement in relation to 6.522 and 6.53, as well as 6.52 and 6.521 more broadly. "How the world is" can be said, such as by the propositions of natural science, but "that it is" is inexpressible. Per the view of language th…
“Wittgenstein basically changed the face of Analytic philosophy for fifty years with the publishing of the *Tractatus*, which was a massive and substantial inspiration for the Logical Positivists. Wittgenstein later came to reject the doctrines of the *Tractatus* when he returned to philosophy at Cam…
“The most prominent example is Kant's "Copernican Revolution" in making our representation of the world foundational to our cognition of it. There were multiple such revolutions in the 20th century. One such was John Rawls' Theory of Justice, which brought about a completely different thematic focus …
“As a general rule, reading *about* a philosopher can help you understand them more than directly picking up their work because you get expert insights. This is especially true for difficult or esoteric writers like Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Heidegger, Deleuze, Lyotard, Wittgenstein, etc. But you have…
“This is kind of Wittgenstein's whole project in the _Tractatus_.
“The most notable in my mind is Wittgenstein who thought he was completely done with philosophy after the Tractatus and years later came back essentially denouncing his previous work and writing "Philosophical Investigations"
“Fun fact: Swift originally wrote that in the opposite sense, about the futility of arguing with _atheists_, who (according to him) used intellectual arguments as a post-hoc rationalization of their adolescent pride and peevishness. ([Letter to a Young Clergyman](
“Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
“Philosophers seldom change their mind about anything as much as Wittgenstein did about language. The shift from his early masterpiece, the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, to his later work, Philosophical Investigations, is as radical as the move from modern to post-modern philosophy, argues Lee Brav…
“Apart from what has already been said here, there is some more evidence which shows, I think, that Wittgenstein himself was against philosophy in some sense. There is, however, a methodological problem, since we can distinguish two very different stages in Wittgenstein's writing. For that, his work …
“Even without consulting his later writings, I think it is pretty clear from the final pages of the Tractatus that Wittgenstein is a mystic. How this is lost on so many people who talk about Wittgenstein remains quite a mystery to me. He is probably the most misinterpreted philosopher of the 20th cen…
“My highschool math teacher would call out a student to the blackboard and give them a problem, and sometimes would say "let me give you a helpful hint: this problem is _very_ difficult." Wittgenstein's helpful hint is that you cannot understand the Tractatus unless you thought its thoughts yourself …
“This is why we need to publish peer reviewed work on this subreddit. Tractatus was the only work published while he was alive, but it's not Wittgenstein's only work. His second work, Philosophical Investigations (which he tried to publish in the 40s), criticizes a lot of his earlier ideas from the T…
“Interesting note: After publishing the Tractatus Wittgenstein believed he had solved philosophy's major problems, so he went into the mountains and taught kindergarten for a number of years.
Convinced? Pick up Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Readers also mention
Books that share discussion threads with Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus — counted from the comments, not curated.
Guides featuring Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Ranked best-of lists and editorial guides where this book's tracked mentions place it.
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus — frequently asked
Is the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus worth reading without a guide?+
r/askphilosophy's highest-upvoted practical answer here (↑95) says no: read about Wittgenstein first, the same way you would for Nietzsche or Heidegger, because going in cold on a text this compressed tends to backfire. That's advice about approach, not a verdict on the book's value once you're prepared.
Did Wittgenstein still believe in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus later in life?+
No. One of the top comments here (↑148) lays out the arc directly: the book reshaped analytic philosophy and inspired the Logical Positivists, and Wittgenstein later returned to Cambridge and rejected its doctrines, writing Philosophical Investigations against his own earlier positions.
What does 'whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent' mean in the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus?+
r/philosophy's discussion (↑283) ties it to Wittgenstein's distinction between what natural science can state and what religious or ethical belief can't be argued into existence, not a dismissal of those beliefs per this excerpt, but a claim that philosophy has nothing rational to add to them.
Why does r/askphilosophy cite specific numbered propositions from the Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus?+
Because the book is structured as numbered propositions, 6.44, 6.52, 6.521, 6.522, 6.53 show up repeatedly here (↑149), and arguments turn on exactly which proposition a claim rests on, closer to citing a specific clause than summarizing a chapter.