Ludwig Wittgenstein must have been frustrating and infuriating to be around. I truly feel for his contemporaries.
As for his philosophy - having tried on several occasions to make sense of it, I am concluding that Wittgenstein's logic is beyond me. And from what I gather from Strahern's brief introduction, Wittgenstein's philosophy is beyond most people - except for Wittgenstein of course. What I do know about it is that it is based on pure logic and fact, and that he dismissed anything that was not based on either logic or fact - which conveniently included any criticism that his idea contained a paradox.
So, devising my own logical system of facts, I'm proposing that Wittgenstein's theory that we can only discuss what is based on fact, is not a fact.
And rightfully so, I am done discussing it.