×
welcome covers

Your complimentary articles

You’ve read all of your complimentary articles for this month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please

If you are a subscriber please sign in to your account.

To buy or renew a subscription please visit Subscriptions.

If you are a print subscriber you can contact us to create an online account.

You can register for a free account to have four complimentary articles per month. We will occasionally email you a newsletter, from which you can unsubscribe at any time. We do not sell personal data or otherwise disclose personal information to other organisations.

Articles

A Nice Knock-Down Argument

by Peter Williams (after Lewis Carroll’s ‘Through the Looking Glass’)

The notion of ‘language-games’, often cited and discussed in my lectures at University, has become something of a pet hate with me. The concept comes originally from Wittgenstein, who asked us to “think of words as instruments characterised by their use.” The general idea is that the meaning of language is dependent upon the user, and words only have meaning within a particular context of use called a ‘language-game’. Some have argued that religious language, for example, should be recognised as a distinctive language-game. This implies that philosophical questions about religious matters, or matters in any ‘language-game’, should be restricted to questions about the role played by words in that particular game; philosophy is prevented from saying anything about the validity of the game itself.