Brian Bix, University of Minnesota
Ludwig Wittgenstein's later work on language, meaning, and rule-following would seem to have obvious applications to legal theory, and many legal theorists have used Wittgenstein's work within their theories of legal (and constitutional) interpretation. This paper attempts to offer some cautions and caveats for the application of Wittgenstein's work. Particular matters of concern are works that seem to rely on the "authority" of Wittgenstein in place of argument; works that leave out needed arguments justifying the application of Wittgenstein's ideas, because the pieces understate the differences between law and the topics Wittgenstein was analyzing/discussing; and works that misunderstand Wittgenstein's "quietism," seeing it as a prescription for practitioners rather than as a prescription for observer-theorists.