2. The method of clarification introduced by Wittgenstein carries the conceptual charge characteristic of natural languages. It is an entirety of partical methods which criss-cross, get transformed one into another, reveal new aspects when approached from new positions. They resist any attempts to introduce delimitations or strict order into their realm, to systematize them. L.Wittgenstein was himself aware of the difficulty and confessed that his own attempts to systematize his remarks turned to be a failure . Yet, within the totality of the analytic procedures suggested by him, one can discern those of a wider scope and of a more generalized meaning. The most significant among them is the "language-game" idea/method. This is a special way of experimenting with language mentally which makes it possible to distinguish within the language - or construct artificially - all kinds of the simplest (or of more sophisticated) models of speech behaviour, which enables us to vary linguistic rules, emphasizing any, interesting to the researcher, aspect of it - in order to get a deaper insight into its nature. Such conventional "games" have referential, rather than direct, cognitive significance; their nature is auxiliary, clarifying, methodological. This method is intended to bring language into action, to turn this static entity into a constant dynamic address to the speech practice, to its usage in different contexts, in varying situations. It is aimed at revealing, through its activity, of the aspects concealed by static language. In this way, differentiation of various kinds of linguistic instruments, as well as numerous types of usings, of different communicative functions performed by them is brought about. This analytic idea is likely to find wide application not only in linguistics, but also in pedagogic practice; it can also be successful in supplementing the already existing logical devices of making language more precise (the latter seems to be especially important for humanities and humanitarian practice with their linguistic means - both rich and ambivalent as far as their spectre of meanings is concerned).
3. The procedure of language games encompasses the whole scope of methods. Among them, is the method of simplifying the language which is followed by gradual complication of it; the method of artificial distinctions; the method of bringing into action of the static conceptual speech apparatus; of varying the contexts of usage; of "deciphering" abstractions (conventional restoration of the initial word-usage), etc. The "family resemblances" method can be mentioned as an example of a relatively autonomous analytic device broadly used in Wittgenstein's works to shake the rigid notions concerning the relation between general notions and reality. Thus, while analyzing the problem of consciousness, he demonstrates how often corresponding words (meaning, thinking, understanding, ets.) generate the idea of their correspondence to some clearly outlined and homogeneous realities, However, as follows from his analysis, there exist innumerable variations of phenomena covered by a single expression, despite the fact that often "there is no one class of features characteristic of all cases" . Analytic devices concentrated around the idea of "family resemblances" are meant to overcome the illusion of literal correspondence of every notion to some unified entity (a set of features and so on). Using them reminds us every time that, to nearly every of the notions, a multifarious reality corresponds which includes a continuity of transitional stages and has no strict boundaries. Indeed, there are no pure biological, psychological or social types; as is known, in real objects, the corresponding features exist as mixed up, varied, intervowen. The analytic idea of "family resemblances", while undermining the oversimplification of notions, helps to correlate variable reality with its conceptual speech expressions in a more flexible and adequate manner.
4. Understanding the essence of the late Wittgenstein's analytic programmes and of his practical methods is hindered by the obtaining practice of reading his analytic considerations (excercises, illustrations and so on) in terns of usual theory. The result is viewing the "language-game" idea as a relativist, subjectivist theory of language, as the idea of "family resemblances" - so, it is treated as a theory of abstraction deserving severe criticism, as a frequently practiced analytical device of translating inner (mental, etc.) phenomena of psychology onto the plane of an external, available to the analysis, concrete action, i.e. as the behaviorist theory of consciousness This "shift in attitude" gives rise to various absurdities: the positions asccribed to the philosopher are those which he himself criticizes, etc. The correct reading of Wittgenstein's texts requires one to take into consideration the fact that the analytic ideas elaborated by him have practical-methodological - rather than theoretic - nature; so, they should be viewed as artificial procedures whose aim is create the habit of accuracy in correlating the verbal with the real. Meanwhile, both readers and investigators of Wittgenstein find it difficult to realize that the author of the analytic interpretation of philosophy could give up theoretical mode of thinking; that philosophy is, in his view, an activity (practice) - rather than a doctrine - aimed at clarifying the conceptual-speech forms through which the complicated, variable and dynamic reality is represented. Along with our critical, polemic attitude towards the analytic interpretation of nature and of the tasks of philosophy as to insufficient one, as to the one overlooking a whole complex of important problems , we would like to stress the need for dialectical-materialist interpretation (and pracctical application) of the authentic content present in the logical-speech analysis which is the real achievement of the XXth century analytic thought.
A.F. Griaznov. The problem of "conceptual necessity" in L.Wittgenstein's works
1. The idea of "conceptual necessity" was investigated in the socalled logic of "internal relations" of British Absolute Idealism. At the center of its metaphysics lied a justification of the necessary character of judgements with their specific conceptual unity (it was supposed that sich a unuty could not be created by lodical constants). Conceptual ties were interpreted as the products of symbolism itself and treated as entirely dependent on the related terms. Necessary and internally essentical character of conceptual ties was explained by an intermediary activity of the "Absolute". In the beginning of the 20th century Russell's logic of "external relations" and his "multiple" theory of judgement stood in opposition to the logic of Absolute Idealism; it rehabilitated independent character of relation is and pluralistic ontology. This theory explained our ability to understand judgement's sense by our direct "acquaintance" with all the constituents. Traditional subject-predicate analysis of judgement's structure was super-seded by "functional" analysis. Inspite of the fact that this early analytical logic of "external relations" was widely accepted for some period of time a restoration of the priority of "internal relations" and the idea of "conceptual necessity" took place in Anglo-American philosophy after that. And this in general was due to lodical and philosophical activity of L.Wittgenstein.
2. Wittgenstein worked out his original "picture" theory in polemic with Russellian views. Wittgensteinian theory was based on idea of conceptual unity and isomorfism of sentence's "logical form" and an elementary fact which is pictured by the sentence. His acknowledgement that the "world" consists of "facts" and not of "things" stresses purely internal relations of logical "objects". There is a close correspondence between these relations and the relations of senses of the sentences. Early Wittgenstein distinguished between "signs" (which have "material" qualities) and "symbols" (which are signs used according to the rules of "logical syntax" and which have sense). "Symbols" are conceptual by their very nature and that is why all logical relations in the Tractatus are interpreted as different kinds of conceptual ties proper. Particularly, so-called "formal concepts" have symbolic character. Amongst them Wittgenstein singles out "function" which can not be its own argument because of its conceptual nature (in F(F) notation external and internal functions are totally different in sense, categorically). Adequate logical symbolism shows the limits of its own use (and this, according to Wittgenstein, makes "theory of types" futile, because paradoxical sentences simply become impossible). In the "right" logical theory there is a unuque system ("logical space") of internal relations and that is why, e.g., even introduction of a third value in a bivalent logic inevitably gives new sense to its interpretation of "truth" and "falsity".