h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Try Google. I got:

"then problems of life have still not been touched at all." - no hits

"the problems of life have still not been touched at all." - 37 hits

Wow! You win, and how! Who's going to tell Sir Anthony Kenny?

I tried a google for "Wittgenstein the problems of life have still not been touched at all" and got not ten but hundreds of hits, including the Role-playing Game network (www.rpg.net) which is all about orcs but starts with a quote: "If we spoke a different language, we would perceive a somewhat different world.
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosopher"

Major update done, credit given at last to co-researchers.

A word to sub-editors: the double quotes are necessary, to distinguish W's words from the rest. Hope this can be accommodated.

Looks good to me

Is this ready to go, or are there any more comments?

I've just had a last chew over the entry . . . I've messed around with this for months now, and made it indigestibly long . . . yes, I think it's ready now thanks Otto

Excellent. This has improved tremendously since I first saw it. Nice one, all!

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!

Thanks guys

Just done a few more adjustments . . . I'll try and leave it alone now.

Just done a few more adjustments . . . I'll try and leave it alone really truly this time. Is this with a sub? May I know whom?

You may indeed - it's with me.

Sorry for the slow reply - this is the first time that I'd checked the PR thread. I haven't yet started my subediting of the entry, but the copy that I'll be working on is at A1024156. Can I quickly ask, to avoid me having to do a direct comparison, were the changes made to A963579 major? If not, I can easily just start by copying the contents of A963579 onto the new version of the entry, then working on that.

I'll be subbing the entry either today or in the very near future.

RhoMuNuQ

RhoMuNuQ -- no, not major, a few new phrases added, a sentence or two you would hardly notice. Best to cut and paste the lot as you suggest.

I hope the "double quotes" can be accommodated as they stand.

Thanks ~R

I'll do just that before I sub it.

RhoMuNuQ

I started subediting your entry today. Can I check one thing just now - are you sure that you'd like everybody currently credited on the article to be given a credit? It's easy for me to add or remove credits as required.


RhoMuNuQ

Yep -- there are just three besides myself (John Luke, Dr D and Bels, in that order if poss) and they all either contributed essential bits or made me go back to the keyboard for a major rewrite . . . besides I'm not collecting a portfolio of solo efforts for any reason . . . on the other hand, perhaps they sould be consulted, as what I've put hasn't been specifically ok'd by them, and perhaps they would rather dissociate . . . ah, the delights of philosophy!

I'm happy to be associated with such a fine entry.

I've finished subbing A1024156. Are there any changes you'd like me to make before I return it to the Editors?

RhoMuNuQ

Well RhoMuNuQ congratulations on a very good editing job! All the points below are small ones. You restore my faith in the editorial process.

Line 1. I deliberately put a space after 1889 before the hyphen; it balances out better (because of the shape of the 1 in the following date, it looks as though there's a space after the hyphen).

Line after header "Early Wittgenstein: the Tractatus" -- strongly is missing an n.

Bulleted list starting "Two plus two". Here I would like a line break at the end of each quoted sentence, before my comment, for clarity.

Line after heading "Persistent theme": [Most, if not all, of the problems of philosophy arise from expecting one kind of language to behave as another kind.] Could this be bold? It is equally or more important as/than the bold stuff above. It is after all the central message in my entry.

Under "Further Information". I suddenly see that I said "mingle imaginative imagery" which is a bit garbled; "mix brilliantly chosen and often startling images" might be more literate.

I am having second thoughts about directing anyone to read second-hand accounts, so after that could we say

. . .and good sense with some very hard going. Philosophers should always be read in (as close as possible) their own words, but for those who are willing to risk inevitable misrepresentations, a very readable interpretation of Wittgenstein's thought is given by David Pears in Wittgenstein (Faber & Faber 1971)

-- or if that's too cumbersome we can amend it.

Throughout, I am sorry to see all my em dashes reduced to hyphens. They're not grammatically the same thing! Is this for unfortunate Netscape-browser readers who don't get the special characters? (At least my Netscape 3.1 doesn't). I was careful to put the spaces where W had them, before and after his (very long) dashes, though writing in my own voice I use dashes without spaces.

Third paragraph of "The Later Writings". I'm sorry to lose my picture-arrow. I had worked it out to my best satisfaction, and it is a very Wittgensteinish thing to include sketches and diagrams in the text. ***Best solution of all: get them to design an arrow-smiley.*** This is sorely needed, as is a pointing -hand smiley (both directions).

If the arrow really can't be restored then we must change the wording to "The conventions, for instance that a pictured arrow (such as on a steet sign) points beyond itself in the direction its head is in . . ."

Thank you! ~Andrew