THE AUTHOR SHOWS THAT WITTGENSTEIN'S PHENOMENOLOGICAL\nSOUNDING TALK IN "PHILOSOPHICAL INVESTIGATIONS", II, XI,\nABOUT "EXPERIENCING MEANINGS" SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD AS AN\nALTERNATIVE ACCOUNT OF WHAT WITTGENSTEIN ELSEWHERE REFERS\nTO AS THE "FORM OF LIFE" OR TOTAL CONTEXT WITHIN WHICH\nLINGUISTIC MEANING IS ESTABLISHED AND MAINTAINED. THIS IS\nDONE BY DRAWING CERTAIN ANALOGIES WITH THE EXPERIENCE OF\nSEEING ASPECTS OR SEEING ASPECT SHIFTS FAMILIAR TO\nGESTALTIST PSYCHOLOGY. THESE OTHERWISE PUZZLING PASSAGES\nARE THUS SHOWN TO BE OF A PIECE WITH WITTGENSTEIN'S VIEWS\nAS EXPRESSED IN PART I OF THE "INVESTIGATIONS".

So argues John Koethe, in contrast to the standard view that Wittgenstein's earlier and later philosophical positions are sharply opposed.

Is visual argumentation possible? My personal opinion is that it is, despite of the burden of verbal argumentation and the numerous critiques made against visual arguments. Insofar as most of these critiques are related to the difference between words and images, I will focus my paper on this issue, which is a theoretical one, as it seems to me that taking these critiques seriously is a first step before analyzing concretely how visual arguments work.