Religion, Meaning, and the Limits of Explanation: Wittgenstein on Frazer

Open Review until 2026-09-25

Authors

  • Rodrigo Lima Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne / University of São Paulo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15845/nwr.v15.3768

Keywords:

Wittgenstein, Frazer, Religion, Intermediary Period, The Golden Bough

Abstract

Summary: This paper explores Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough, advancing the working hypothesis that these reflections emerge at the intersection of three key ideas that Wittgenstein decisively resists. First, Wittgenstein challenges the assumption that language games can be analyzed independently of the “vital” or “cultural” practices in which they are embedded. Second, he rejects the positivist notion that the progress of natural science will eventually render religion obsolete. Third, and most pointedly, he disputes the idea of a “universal grammar” underlying religious practices — a supposed structure hidden beneath the surface diversity of religious expressions. Through his remarks, Wittgenstein not only offers a powerful critique of the search for hidden essences — emphasizing the irreducibly plural and context-dependent nature of religious language — but also lays the groundwork for the methodological orientation that will characterize his later philosophical investigations.

References

ACKERMAN, R. J. G. Frazer: His Life and Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1987.

BEARD, M. Frazer, Leach, and Virgil: The Popularity (and Unpopularity) of the Golden Bough. In: Comparative Studies in Society and History. Vol. 34. nº 2. pp. 203-224. 1992.

CHILD, W. Wittgenstein, Scientism & Anti-Scientism in the Philosophy of Mind. In: Wittgenstein and Scientism. Jon Beale & Ian James Kidd (eds.). pp. 81 - 100. London: Routledge. 2017.

ENGELMANN, M. L. The faces of ‘necessity’, perspicuous representation, and the irreligious ‘cult of the useful’. The Spenglerian background to the first set of remarks. In: Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer: the text & the matter. Lars Albinus, J. G. F. Rothhaupt & Aidan Seery (eds.). Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 129 – 173. 2016.

FRAZER. J. G. O Ramo de Ouro. Sabine MacCormack & Mary Douglas (eds.). Rio de Janeiro: Zahar. 1982.

____________. The Golden Bough: a study in magic and religion. Abridged Edition. Palgrave Macmillan. 1990.

HACKER, P. M. S. Developmental Hypotheses and Perspicuous Representations: Wittgenstein on Frazer's "Golden Bough". The Jerusalem Philosophical Quaterly. nº 41. pp. 277 – 299. 1992.

ORZECHOWSKI, A. & PICHLER, A. A Critical Note on the Editions of Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough. In: Wittgenstein Studien. Vol.2. pp. 1–17. 1995.

PALMIÉ, S. Translation is not Explanation: Remarks on the Intellectual History and Context of Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer. In : The mythology in our language. Giovanni da Col & Stephan Palmié (eds.). Chicago: Hau Books. pp. 1 - 27. 2018.

ROTHHAUPT, J. G. F. Wittgensteins „Bemerkungen über Frazers Golden Baugh“. Verortung im Gesamtnachlass – Einbindung in die Philosophietradition, Editions- und Publikationsgeschichte. In: Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer: the text & the matter. Lars Albinus, J. G. F. Rothhaupt & Aidan Seery (eds.). Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 11 - 83. 2016.

SMITH, J. Z. When the Bough Breaks. In: History of Religions. pp. 342-371. Vol. 12. nº 4. 1973.

__________. In comparison a magic dwells. In: A Magic Still Dwells: Comparative Religion in the Postmodern Age. Kimberley C. Patton & Benjamin C. Ray (.eds). pp. 23-44. Berkeley: University of California Press. 2000.

WESTERGAARD, P. K. On the ‘Ketner and Eigsti Edition’ of Wittgenstein’s Remarks on Frazer’s ‘The Golden Bough. In: Nordic Wittgenstein Review. Vol. 4. nº 2. pp. 117–42. 2015.

Consulted material on Wittgenstein:

WITTGENSTEIN. Remarks on James Frazer’s The Golden Bough. In: Synthese. Vol. 17. nº 3. pp. 233–53. 1967.

_____________. The Blue & Brown Books. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell. 1969.

_____________. Culture and Value. Translation by P. Winch. G. H. von Wright (ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1980.

_____________. Philosophical Investigations. Rev. 4th ed. Transl. G. E. M. Anscombe; P. M. S. Hacker & J. Schulte. P. M. S. Hacker & J. Schulte (eds.). Oxford: Blackwell. 2009.

_____________. Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough. Translation by S. Palmié. In: The mythology in our language. Giovanni da Col & Stephan Palmié (eds.). Chicago: Hau Books. pp. 29 – 73. 2018.

_____________. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Trad.: Luis Henrique Lopes dos Santos. São Paulo: Editora Edusp. 2001.

_____________. The Big Typescript – TS 213. Oxford: Blackwell. 2005.

_____________. Wittgenstein’s Nachlass. The Bergen Electronic Edition. CD-Room. Oxford. 2000.

Published

2026-08-28

How to Cite

Lima, R. (2026). Religion, Meaning, and the Limits of Explanation: Wittgenstein on Frazer: Open Review until 2026-09-25. Nordic Wittgenstein Review, 15. https://doi.org/10.15845/nwr.v15.3768

Issue

Section

Articles