Rationality and the variety of language games

Giacomo Turbanti
Università di Pisa, Italy | turbanti.giacomo@gmail.com

Received: 30-April-2018 | Accepted: 15-August-2018 | Published: 30-June-2019
Disputatio [Jun. 2019], Vol. 8, No. 9, pp. 00-00 | DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.3247931
Article | [EN] | Full Text | Statistics | Copyright Notice [es] | Vol. 8 No. 9

How to cite this article:
Turbanti, Giacomo (2019). «Rationality and the variety of language games». Disputatio. Philosophical Research Bulletin 8, no. 9: pp. 00-00.


Abstract | One of the most striking clashes between the results of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s reflections on language games and Robert Brandom’s normative analysis of pragmatics concerns the pride of place granted by the latter to assertional practices. While Wittgenstein believes that there is no privileged language game, Brandom maintains that the game of giving and asking for reasons is fundamental for the possibility of any linguistic practice to be properly meaningful. Recently, Rebecca Kukla and Mark Lance proposed to generalize Brandom’s normative pragmatics in order to provide a more fine–grained analysis of the normativity that governs discursive practices. It is a courageous enterprise that challenges the predominance of the cognitive approach in pragmatics by underpinning a different way to understand the notion of meaning. Their proposal, however, requires to take into account many different sorts of speech acts on a par and, by doing so, it is in tension with Brandom’s approach. This paper explores the shape of this tension in order to see whether or not a unitary characterization of rationality can be envisaged in Wittgenstein’s and Brandom’s way of accounting for the ability to deploy conceptual contents in linguistic practices.
Keywords |
Normative Pragmatics · Declarative Fallacy · Discursive Rationality · Language Games · Space of Reason.

La racionalidad y la variedad de los juegos de lenguaje

Resumen | Uno de los choques más impactantes entre los resultados de las reflexiones de Ludwig Wittgenstein acerca de los juegos de lenguaje y el análisis normativo de la pragmática de Robert Brandom se relaciona con la importancia asignada por éste a las prácticas de afirmación. Mientras que Wittgenstein cree que no haya ningún juego de lenguaje privilegiado, Brandom mantiene que el juego de dar y pedir razones es fundamental para la posiblidad de que cualquier práctica lingüística sea apropiadamente significativa. Recientemente, Rebecca Kukla y Mark Lance propusieron generalizar la pragmática normativa de Brandom para ofrecer un análisis más diferenciado de la normatividad que gobierna las prácticas discursivas. Se trata de una empresa valiente que reta el predominio del acercamiento cognitivo en pragmática, dando soporte a una manera diferente de entender la noción de significado. Su planteamiento requiere, sin embargo, que se tomen en cuenta a la par muchos diferentes tipos de actos de habla y de esta manera genera tensión con el planteamiento de Brandom. Este trabajo explora el contorno de esta tensión para averiguar si se puede o no visualizar una caracterización unitaria de la racionalidad a la manera en que Wittgenstein y Brandom dan cuenta de la capacidad de aplicar contenidos conceptuales en las prácticas lingüísticas.
Palabras Clave | Práctica discursiva · Inferencialismo · Juegos de Lenguaje · Pluralismo · Seguir una Regla.


References

Belnap, Nuel (1990). “Declaratives Are Not Enough”. Philosophical Studies 59 num. 1: pp. 1–30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00368389

Bezuidenhout, Anne (2017). “Contextualism and Semantic Minimalism”. In The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. Yan Huang. pp. 21–46. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borg, Emma (2004). Minimal Semantics. Oxford: Claredon Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/0199270252.001.0001

Brandom, Robert (1983). “Asserting”. Noûs, vol. 17, num. 4: 637–650. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2215086

Brandom, Robert (1984). “Reference Explained Away”. Journal of Philosophy, vol. 81,  num. 9. pp. 469–492. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2026268

Brandom, Robert (1988). “Inference, Expression, and Induction”. Philosophical Studies, vol. 54, num. 2: pp. 257–285. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00354516

Brandom, Robert (1994). Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Brandom, Robert (2000). Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Brandom, Robert (2008). Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199542871.001.0001

Brandom, Robert (2011). Perspectives on Pragmatism. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Cappelen, Herman, and Ernie Lepore (2005). “A Tall Tale: In Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism.” In Contextualism in Philosophy: Knowledge, Meaning, and Truth, ed. Gerhard Preyer and Georg Peter, pp. 197–219. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carston, Robyn (2002). Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.

Dewey, John. (1925–1953). The Later Works of John Dewey [LW]. Ed. Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Gazdar, Gerald (1979). Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition and Logical Form. New York: Academic Press.

Grice, Paul (1957). “Meaning”. Philosophical Review, vol. 66, num. 3: pp. 377–388. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2182440

Grice, Paul (1968). “Utterer’s Meaning, Sentence–Meaning, and Word–Meaning.” Foundations of Language, vol. 4, num. 3. p. 225–242.

Grice, Paul (1969). “Utterer’s Meaning and Intention”. Philosophical Review, vol. 78, num. 2: pp. 147–177. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2184179

Grice, Paul (1975). “Logic and Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics, ed. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, vol. 3, pp. 41–58. New York: Academic Press.

Habermas, Jürgen (2002). “From Kant to Hegel: On Robert Brandom’s Pragmatic Philosophy of Language”. European Journal of Philosophy vol. 8, num. 3: pp. 322–355. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0378.00114

Kukla, Rebecca, and Mark Lance (2009). “Yo!” and “Lo!”: The Pragmatic Topography of the Space of Reasons. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Kukla, Rebecca, and Mark Lance (2010). “Perception, Language, and the First Person.” In Reading Brandom On Making it Explicit, ed. Bernhard Weiss and Jeremy Wanderer. New York: Routledge.

McDowell, John (1984). “Wittgenstein on Following a Rule.” Synthese, vol. 58, num. 3: pp. 325–364. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00485246

McDowell, John (1994). Mind and World. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

McDowell, John (2005). “Motivating Inferentialism: Comments on Making It Explicit (Ch. 2).” In The Pragmatics of Making It Explicit, ed. Pirmin Stekeler–Weithofer, pp. 121–140. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Price, Huw (2004). “Naturalim Without Representationalism.” In Naturalism in Question, ed. Mario de Caro and David Macarthur. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press.

Recanati, François (2003). Literal Meaning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615382

Recanati, François (2010). Truth–Conditional Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226993.001.0001

Ryle, Gilbert (1949). “Meaning and Necessity.” Philosophy, vol. 24, num. 88: pp. 69–76. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100006781

Sbisá, Marina (2007). Detto Non Detto. Le Forme Della Comunicazione Implicita. Bari–Roma: Laterza.

Sellars, Wilfrid (1962). “Truth and ‘Correspondence’.” Journal of Philosophy, vol. 59, num. 2: pp. 29–56. Reprinted in (Sellars, 1963). doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/2023294

Sellars, Wilfrid (1963). Science, Perception and Reality. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Reprinted by Ridgeview, Atascadero, (1991).

Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson (2004). “Relevance Theory.” In: The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, pp. 607–632. Oxford: Blackwell.

Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson (1986). Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.

Tomasello, Michael (2008). Origins of Human Communication. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7551.001.0001

Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1953). Philosophical Investigations [PI]. Oxford: Blackwell. 2nd ed., 1958.


© The author(s) 2019. This work, published by Disputatio [www.disputatio.eu], is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License [BY–NC–ND]. The copy, distribution and public communication of this work will be according to the copyright notice. For inquiries and permissions, please email: boletin@disputatio.eu.