Abstract

The differences between categories of play in English and spiel in German (or jeu in French and so on) are essential because any complex ludic category includes games that are organized and restricted by roles and rules. My choice to deal with Wittgensteinian views of spiel (which is translated by default as ‘play’) is influenced by the fact that his argument in German about the impossibility and futility of a philosophical definition of spiel embodies the quintessence of the problem: the linguistic obstacle that prevents correct interpretation of human play. Methodologically, I make the philosophical question of dependence a linguistic one. The article concludes by defending the position that game is only one of the diverse activities realizing human play, which is a basic existential phenomenon that can be considered philosophically through the category of ‘other being’.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.