Talk:Language game (philosophy)

HTML comment

Could someone please take that HTML comment out? I don't know how to hide content, and don't want to delete the author's structure.

Which HTML comment? Stumps 11:34, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The concept needs a header

That list under "The concept ..." seems like it needs a header, but I don't feel quite qualified to write one...

What is " PI 2"? (mentioned in Description section)

What is " PI 2"? It is mentioned in the Description section of this article: "...The term 'language game' is used to refer to: Fictional examples of language use that are simpler than our own everyday language. (e.g. PI 2)..."

I have searched, but get many spurious hits on a computer named Raspberry PI2, and a File Extension called ".PI2".

If the answer is already in Wikipedia, recommend adding a link.

68.35.173.107 (talk) 21:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

It's one of Ludwig Wittgenstein's 'Philosophical Investigations'. PI7 is wikilinked, but maybe it would be better to link every PI to the page... Air (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

run-on sentence

"Because Lyotard's discussion is primarily applied in the contexts of authority, power and legitimation, where Wittgenstein's is broad, and concerned to mark distinctions between a wide range of activities in which language users engage, we can deduce that Lyotard uses the "language-gaminess" which Wittgenstein points out, to direct his own analysis and attention to the ways in which certain language-games, when in service to ideals, tend to form ideas about the world in their navigation, and that the larger language-gameplay whereby these certain smaller language-games are more likely to play out in certain conglomerations that reinforce and comment upon, the "opinion" side of relationships between propositions about the world, at the risk of denying important contrary or non-similar "judgments" if they clash with typical game-play."

Needs to be broken up and made understandable to lay readers. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 17:51, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jonathan Tweet: OR-alert: "Because Lyotard's discussion is [impenetrable gobbledygook], we can deduce that Lyotard uses X in order to Y [more gobbledygook]." Wikipedia editors don't deduce, we summarize (not the case here) what reliable sources say (none are in evidence), through the use of citations (there aren't any). Ergo, I've blanked the section as unsourced original research.

Much of the rest of the article deserves closer scrutiny. Per Wikipedia's policy on Verifiability, unsourced material may be challenged and removed. The burden of proof is on the person who wishes to add material. Editors should not hesitate to remove unsourced content. (Please use a detailed edit summary to say what you are doing and why, and link to this TP section, or raise another.) Mathglot (talk) 07:23, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Arabia 2601:40A:4200:4AC0:8DBC:6761:633E:74F1 (talk) 00:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)