Reasons to Doubt the Ambiguity Argument: Contrived Wittgensteinian Valuations Lead to a False Dichotomy

Scott Soames argued that Wittgenstein’s private language argument reveals ambiguity, presenting two possible conclusions, wherein either conclusion exhibits devastating implications for the private language argument. I contend that interpreting Wittgenstein’s reasoning holistically dissipates inclinations to infer ambiguity in the private language argument. In particular, I challenge Soames’ ambiguity argument by demonstrating its contrived limitations, resulting in a false dichotomy. However, allowing the dichotomy for argument’s sake adequately corresponds to Wittgenstein’s conclusion, raising further questions about the ambiguity argument’s veracity and redundancy. As such, Wittgenstein’s private language argument withstands charges of ambiguity, demonstrating reasons to doubt Soames’ ambiguity argument.