so, in order to assess the apparent conflicts between Conant's position and Wittgenstein's abundantly documented shifts in methodology and outlook between the Tractatus and PI, we have to take on-board a 'resolute' view of the 'continuity' between the Tractatus and PI first, and only then can we discuss the discontinuities. So, we have to have found ourselves in substantial agreement with Conant before we can actually even attempt substantial disagreement. No thank you. You're talking nonsense, James.
If you are interested in whether the perceived discontinuities actually stem from a dogmatic presupposition, then it is worth looking whether there is such a dogmatic presupposition that has so far shaped your thinking. But of course not everybody is interested in doing such things.
