Language Games

A regular focal point of Philosophies of Language has been the relation between 'Sense' and 'Reference'. The Reference of a term is some object, while its Sense is an internal connotation. In the classic example, The Morning Star and the Evening Star have the same Reference, because they both point to the same object. But they have different Senses, i. e. that one appears in the morning, the other in the evening. The difference between Sense and Reference is brought out by the expression "The Morning Star = The Evening Star", because asserting that the Referent is the same as itself is trivial, whereas revealing the commonality behind the two Senses is informative. So, many of the debates in Philosophy of Language concern whether or not the Meaning of a term is its Sense or its Reference. Now, the limitations of this framing of Philosophy of Language is born out by an expression such as 'Take one step forward', which, plainly has no Reference, and, thus, which demonstrates that Language is more than merely descriptive. The later Wittgenstein is usually credited with recognizing this limitation, which he attempts to correct by broadening the scope of Language under the rubric 'Language Games'. Despite the subsequent influence of his innovation, the credit is misplaced, because Peirce broke down those methodological barriers a good fifty years before Wittgenstein's efforts, and they are implicit in Kant's Practical turn. Of especial concern to Evolvementalism is how the notion of 'Language Games' glosses over the distinction between what might be called retrospective Language, e. g. descriptions, and prospective Language, e. g. imperatives and interrogatives. In the Formaterial scheme, retrospection is Temporal, and prospection is Spatial, so, because Formaterialism insists on the incommensurability of Time and Space, it rejects Wittgenstein's homogenizing of e. g. descriptions and imperatives. That is not to say that they do not combine in Formaterialism, but, rather, their combination, which is ingredient in all Language acts, is potentially Evolvemental, which means that even the Wittgensteinian innovation misses the Phronetic and Political significance of Language.