1 OCTOBER 1994, Page 31

Sir: Paul Johnson's summary survey of this century's philosophers (And

another thing, 24 September) is fascinating. His philoso- pher 'ought to be a thinker of pure and penetrating intelligence who uses it both to seek truth and acquire wisdom and convey them to the rest of us in ways we can use in our life and work'. Philosophers up and down the country will be glad to have, at long last, a job description to hand, and many will no doubt now either completely revise their methods or give up and turn to more useful occupations.

If he had learned more from Popper, whom he justifiably eulogises as a very important thinker, he would perhaps have tried harder to refute his own hypothesis about the philosopher's tasks and this cen- tury's philosophical achievements. Has Mr Johnson not considered that it may, for example, depend to a very large extent on

LETTERS

us whether we can use any of the 'truths' and wisdoms philosophers may have tried to convey? What Johnson got out of Rus- sell's work is obviously very little. Does he deny, however, that many may in fact have learned a great deal from Russell?

This also applies to Ayer and Wittgen- stein, both of whom changed some of their earlier views later in life and admitted frankly that they thought their previous positions to have been mistaken. This is surely a sign of intellectual honesty of a high degree, and an outstanding example of the wisdom and philosophical spirit John- son ought to welcome. His assessment of Wittgenstein in particular is utterly dismal in its inadequacy. Wittgenstein's later philosophical work is of the utmost impor- tance and the implications of its arguments, for example about 'private language', are still occupying philosophers with a degree of urgency and fascination which will cer- tainly outlast this century.

To Mr Johnson, a philosophical method or position he cannot readily apply as a practical formula, as he claims to be able to do with Popper's, is apparently useless or worse, for, alas, he himself is no philoso- pher. He should be more circumspect in his remarks on a field about which he clearly knows so little.

I. D. Evers

Coton Hall, Bridgnorth, Shropshire