Criticisms of Wittgenstein's language games

Question 1

Rush Rhees’ criticism

Answer 1

Playing games is nothing like human language:

• a game of chess can be learnt by someone who has never played hame before, perhaps by someone explaining the rules
• language much more complex - language needs to be explained using language
• Rhees argues languages and games are two completely different concepts

Question 2

The issue of language games not allowing meaningful conversations between different groups of language users

Answer 2

• Wittgenstein argued that to understand a language game, one must be immersed the form of life to which it relates.
• if you are not part of it, you cannot comprehend meaning
• makes it impossible then for people involved in different games to understand each other. Atheist can’t debate with religious believer e.g.

Question 3

The issue of language games not providing adequate meaning for the word ‘God’

Answer 3

• words used to talk about God are meaningful regardless of what is said or how they are intended.
• this makes it impossible for us to come to an accurate understanding of what God is

Question 4

The issue with the coherence theory of truth

Answer 4

• all definitions can be considered true within the coherence theory of truth, if they make sense within the context in which they are used.
• there is no necessity for any claim about God to be factually correct then