system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Was Wittgenstein really at odds with philosophy as a whole?

Wittgenstein seems to be brought up as a kind of great anti-philosopher who wanted to end the practice, at least in a sense. After reading some of his work (the Tractatus and about half of PI), it doesn't really seem this is a good description, with the exception of a couple flippant aphorisms that get taken out of context. It would be kind of odd that he would be so prolific if he thought that philosophy was really a useless field.

There are a few things, though, that I've noticed about his work (correct me if I'm wrong here):

1) He thought philosophy is misguided in general with it's goals and methods

2) He thought that he solved the crucial issues at the heart of philosophy

3) He thought that all of philosophy boils down to X (in this case, X is language)

4) He had a unique, controversial method for solving philosophical problems

I think these apply to most, if not all, major philosophers! What makes Wittgenstein the exception here?
gpt
At least with respect to the later Wittgenstein (I also think the earlier, but that's a different issue), he's not so much against philosophy as he is philosophical theorizing.  Wittgenstein does not think that there ought to be philosophical theories.  Rather than functioning to produce a body of knowledge, like natural science or mathematics, Wittgenstein thinks that philosophy should function therapeutically, freeing us from conceptual confusions, often arising from the misuse of language.  

This is a specific meta-philosophical view, and most philosophers do not agree with it.  Indeed, most of the so-called "major philosophers" see themselves as putting forward philosophical theories, making philosophical claims, and what not.  Wittgenstein is against all of that.  In that sense, he is "at odds with philosophy."