I enjoy debate, banter, discussion and argument. Concepts put forward for discussion, arguments presented and tested by debate can be quite heated, or fizzle out once the dreariness and lack of originality has become obvious. But there have to be ground rules or guiding principles, otherwise what should be a free and lively exchange of ideas can disintegrate into mere bickering.
Wittgenstein’s ideas may have been so far ahead of his time, and puzzling to his contemporaries, that he avoided public discussion. That would be a pity because presenting an argument in writing may bring clarity, but it lacks the excitement of public debate. Part of that excitement can be the moment when new thinking has been embraced. Who would not enjoy sharing a discussion in which an idea was put forward, such as Wittgenstein’s ‘seeing as’, and thrashing it around a bit to determine its validity. We may bring our knowledge of similar concepts as the ticket to the debate and it is language and its ability to persuade that makes listening, comprehending, questioning. and explaining an essential facet of human interaction.
One story has it that Wittgenstein would rather whistle classical tunes, than defend his philosophical theories publicly…
http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk/teaching_staff/ahmed/WittgensteinPhilosophicalInvestigationsLecture15.pdf
odespinner 