Wittgenstein didn't leave us "philosophy"; he left a pathway for a more perspicuous intellect. This came about because he possessed abnormal cognitive traits that were hyper-sensitive to context.
With these tools, he discovered that language was predicated upon three natural phenomena: (a) the task being signified, (b) the social traits being implicated; (c) and the picture that emerged before the mind's eye. This discovery was revolutionary. It meant that language wasn’t a function of a mental state or an "intention"; it was a function of how the intellect behaved in the speech act. Meaning was usage—or rather, the intellect, used.
This completely alters how we must think conceptually. And it changes how we must perceive arguments that use not only general words (like game and chair) but also scientific terms. It requires us to point people to what their intellect is doing in a speech act—called “therapy”—rather than focusing upon the premises in an argument. Not since Aristotle has the subject of critical reasoning been so revolutionized.
And it also radically changes how value judgments, religious beliefs and ethics are perceived to work. Each involves fitting a picture into a social context, a task that requires connoisseur judgment.
It is a mistake to think that the field of philosophy owns Wittgenstein. Anyone interested in better qualitative acuity needs to both understand and teach the new critical thinking.