In this collection of essays I chose to read, as a break from my other reading, Deep Disquietudes:Reflections on Wittgenstein as Anti-philosopher by Louis Sass. Having started my reading about Wittgenstein with ‘Wittgenstein’s Vienna’ nearly forty years ago and re-reading it along with ‘The Duty of Genius’ by Ray Monk and ‘Young Ludwig’ by Brian McGuinness several years ago; he , Wittgenstein , remains in some ways enigmatic. A lot attention gets paid to his ‘Jewishness’ and his estrangement from that heritage, as an important component of his self-judgment :but Weininger and his Antisemitism was an important component of ‘Sex and Character’. What I find really puzzling is the sometime mention of his being ‘queer’ as worthy of consideration, but this point of information remains inert, in the larger frames of explanation, constructed by almost all scholars, Monk being the most forthright about this utterly overlooked area of his existence. Perhaps even a primary concern considering his advocacy of Otto Weininger’s ‘Sex and Character’. Even Mr. Sass relegates his discussion of Wittgenstein’s sexuality to a footnote, number 45. As a once closeted person reading about Wittgenstein and his life, I was struck that so much of his life may have been about his ‘sainthood’ but much of his seeming emotional perversity could be related to  a ‘closeted’ state: call it recognition or even projection. Mr. Sass argues that Wittgenstein was ‘schizoid, or ‘schizothymic’ in his orientation to the world of others and himself. I could not nor would not debate that issue, but I can say that recognition of his state of being regarding his sexuality demands a certain attempt at honesty. Except for Monk, I find forthright discussion of this very important issue lacking. I would not argue it as all encompassing in nature, but I would argue its significance in terms of emotional growth and the necessary ability to form lasting bonds with other humans, even feeling a sense of solidarity with his fellow creatures, all the while recognizing the importance, the centrality, of his philosophical orientation. Are alienation and self-alienation necessary conditions to critique of self and others,to the philosophical impulse of the Post-Enlightenment?