BONUS - Religious language: Language Games (Wittgenstein)

What are Wittgenstein’s language games?

• He claimed that words get their meaning by connecting to the social reality, not the physical reality

• Social reality composed of different types of social interaction, which Wittgenstein described as different ‘games’ that we play

• Game is meant in a very broad sense, a social practice governed by rules

• Throughout life, we are inducted into various social roles/games and we learn, consciously or unconsciously, what behaviour is considered socially correct in that context, i.e., follows the rules.

• Crucial insight: recognised that words are a type of behaviour

What does Wittgenstein say about the differing meaning of language depending on the context?

• If we start speaking in an interview the way we speak to friends, that would be strange in that context

• Meaning is therefore contextual

• Depends on social context, the ‘language game’ in which we are speaking

• Meaning of language depends on how it is used in a particular social game, not on its reference to physical reality

• Meaningfulness (or TRUTH) is subjective/relative to the language game

How does Wittgenstein distinguish between the scientific language game and the religious one?

• Scientific language game about reality, since it is about evidence, experience and reason

• Religious language game is about faith and social communities, conventions & emotions

Example of different interpretations of religious language across different religions

‘God allows suffering to develop our character and we will be rewarded in heaven’

• Fits with the Christian language game; has meaning for those who play this game

• Does not fit with the atheistic or Buddhist language games, so it is not meaningful to them

What is Wittgenstein fideism?

• Religion is purely a matter of faith

• Separate language game to science which is a matter of a posteriori reason

Strengths of language games

1. Defends religious language from challenges of verification and falsification - shows that rel lang does have meaning for those who belong to a religious language game

2. Reflects reality - religious people DO believe the religious assertions they make have meaning, even if those outside the language game don’t

3. Promotes pluralism and respect for others’ views - many valid truths that we can all co-exist together

Criticisms of Language Games

1. Leads to theological anti-realism. When someone says ‘God exists’, they don’t just mean within their Form of Life, they mean it objectively

2. Dividing up human social life into different language games could become messy - are there games within games?

3. Does every single religious believer operate within their own language game within the language game?

What does ‘Form of Life’ mean?

• Shared background of human cultural practices, social activities, and behaviours that underpin language and meaning

• Not just structure of rules, but a way of living

How does Wittgenstein’s interpretation of religious language differ from Ayer and Flew?

• Taking a word from a religious language game and trying to analyse it in the context of a scientific one misunderstands how meaning works

• Words get their meaning from the game in which they are spoken

• No surprise to Wittgenstein that Ayer and Flew find religious language meaningless, since they are not religious and so are not a participant in the religious language game