Wittgenstein' s emphasis on accepting the unknown as opposed to trying to fill in the metaphysical gaps of esoterica is important as a grounding point in philosophy. It may be this that what made him stand out in the twentieth century, and in this one. However, I am not so sure about explanations in terms of brain philosophy. That is because it moves and pulls the focus into psychology, as the master science, almost making philosophy redundant. The empirical aspects of investigation are important but it is questionable whether all can be reduced to the physical.GE Morton wrote: ↑January 9th, 2023, 1:39 pm"Realization" is the wrong word there, with respect to Wittgenstein. "Recognition" would be more accurate. The former implies that one has gained some sort of grasp, or insight, into the "ineffable." The latter term merely suggests that some questions are unanswerable; there is no suggestion or pretense of esoteric knowledge.JackDaydream wrote: ↑January 8th, 2023, 11:24 pm
It is interesting that your take on 'enlightenment' is along the lines of rationality, as in the enlightenment and Steven Pinker in his book, 'Enlightenment' took this stance. The comparison between a moment of knowledge along the rational direction in comparison with the idea of mysticism is important. The mystic is said to sometimes reach the realisation of 'the ineffable'. It is questionable whether the mystic experience if it is beyond words is open to question. I wonder where Wittgenstein lies in this because he spoke of being silent of that which one could not speak about.
Ideas are not reducible to brain chemistry, but they are fully explicable in terms of brain chemistry.There may be the eureka moment in which both intuition and logic come together because the most profound ways of rational understanding also draw upon intuition and imagination. Also, this level of understanding may involve an intimate engagement with ideas which requires brain chemistry but cannot be reduced to it entirely.
If Alfie or Bruno have ever had the occasional spliff or any unusual experiences at all, including the extrasensory, they may end up having some discussion as to how experiences can be explained and understood meaningfully. The ideas may be explained by biochemistry but it is possible to ask what is explanation? Is it a material or human construct, or something in between?