Paragraph 185: Continuation of the number series

In paragraph 185, Wittgenstein provides an example that he uses to see more clearly what our language game entails in other respects, which we tend to mischaracterize as a psychological myth about understanding, and thus make this psychological state the source of correct use. This example goes back to teaching the child to continue the series of numbers written by his teacher, and "Getgenstein" has described the situation he wants us to look at as follows: "Now that the student, judging by the usual criteria, is mastering the natural number series, we teach him to write another series of the original numbers, and get him to the stage of writing a series that takes the following picture: 0, N, 2N, 3N, etc. This is according to an order that we issue to him in an order that takes the form of "Pen", as he writes the series of natural numbers in another order in this order "1" - let's say that we have done several exercises and tested it up to the number 1000 - here we make him continue to write a series (let's say *2 after the number 1000, we find him writing: 1000, 1004, 1008, 1012. We say to him, "Look what I did!" but he doesn't understand, we say, "I was meant to add two: look how I started writing the series!", and he replies by saying, "Yes, isn't that right? Wittgenstein describes this state as a state of natural interaction of the student with the training he receives in a way different from us: "It has become natural for this person to understand about us and our interpretations, as we should understand it in the following order: "Add 2 to 1000, 4 to 2000, 6 to 3000 and so on". This situation is associated with someone reacting to an indicative gesture by looking from the tip of the finger to the wrist rather than the other way around, so the example shows us what Wittgenstein described early on as an "extraordinary situation" [PI 141], there is nothing in the training or guidance we receive (in a somewhat ambiguous way) that forces us to apply a particular rule, but we naturally respond to the training and guidance by continuing to use the rule in that particular way, and the same training and guidance found in a paragraph 185. The issue here is not a question of meaning, Kripke says, but that Wittgenstein uses an unusual situation as a point of comparison, to highlight aspects of the ordinary situation that we tend to misunderstand. More: https://braheen.com/publications/فتجنشتاين-والبحوث-الفلسفية — Source: Published on Facebook's "Braheen Center" page https://www.facebook.com/braheen.org/posts/pfbid02PsJkP8Xyp7kpcmqNYt4ssSezFySitdygWk9WrV1JrKdJaDyqxJJeZ3jjLgCPGojjl