The very act of mentioning Wittgenstein's name in connection with either Marx or sociology, let alone both simultaneously, is apt to disturb any self-respecting Wittgensteinian. On the face of it nothing could seem farther from Marx's celebrated exhortation to philosophers to change the world than Wittgenstein's admonition that "philosophy may in no way interfere with the use of language . . . it leaves everything as it is".¹ Furthermore, what could form a sharper contrast with Marx's allegation that history is the history of class struggle than Wittgenstein's claim that it would be pointless to advance theses in philosophy because everybody would agree about them.² Wittgenstein's personal conservatism and his abiding concern with the works of such conservative authors as Spengler, Dostoievsky, Tolstoi and Weininger has led J. C. Nyíri to assert that Wittgenstein's mature thought is nothing less than a defense of a peculiar brand of neo-conservatism.³ Whatever we may discover about Wittgenstein in the future, it is most unlikely that we shall ever turn up the slightest interest in politics let alone political activism. Finally as regards sociology, early in his career Wittgenstein maintained that "the word "philosophy' must mean something whose place is above or below the natural sciences, not beside them".⁴