A Terms Game Can Be Used Beliefs Essay

A terms game can be used as a metaphor for organisations. This is one way post modern theorists think we ought to now take a look at firms; in terms of words. This will allow them to look and analyse organisations from another type of point of view as they believe that theories such as Taylorism are now becoming obsolete. This essay looks at terms games in conditions of three philosophers: Wittgenstein, Foucault and Derrida. The essay will also check out how company can be defined because of this of such terminology games.

According to Wittgenstein a Language game can be described as 'language and the activities into which it is woven into' (Goldstein, 2004, p. 546). To be able to imagine terms in this sense means to imagine a kind of life. Forms of life are the various types of activities carried out by humans, in this sense we look at them as speech, this causes the perception that our forms of life are complicated because of the complexness of the terminology video games we partake in. In his later work of Philosophical Investigations, section 23, Wittgenstein lists a few of the language game titles that humans play: 'Supplying purchases and obeying them, Explaining the appearance of any object, or supplying its measurements, constructing an subject from a information (a drawing)', (Wittgenstein, 1958). We unknowingly be a part of language video games every day and each game has its guidelines and goals. Wittgenstein gives little attention to the players in words games, and suggests that it would be almost impossible for two language players to really have the same linguistic pragmability, (Kopytko, 2007). Which means that each individuals player is exclusive in terms of experience in a interpersonal context. An example of a player would be a child learning to speak. In Wittgenstein's Language games, the words we use to speak are the objects found in the overall game.

For Wittgenstein the guidelines the most important factor in a terminology game. Although a guideline cannot be defined, Wittgenstein is applicable it to the 'family resemblance' strategy, words which are used in a single game can be utilized in another; all of them are deeply intertwined. Each community has a marginally different set of rules for terms games, depending on the understanding, certainty and knowing of the guidelines. Therefore humans that are participating in language games they could have different guidelines and there may be confusion in understanding one another, for example two food sellers may have the same aims but use different dialect games between personnel to identify these objectives e. g. stocktake/inventory. For rules to be used in language video games a certain amount of foreknowledge is needed to be able to understand them, Wittgenstein thinks that for one to understand the guideline they must have the ability to put it on (Kopytko, 2007). Grammar within vocabulary also enforces a network of rules which determine which linguistic moves make sense and which do not. For instance, one cannot say that 'I know I've a brain' as a result of question and scepticism about knowing something that has not been seen. Wittgenstein argues that there surely is not final set of rules that we follow and they're constantly changing.

In the start of Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein criticises his earlier work in Tractatus. In Tractatus he 'tries to make a universally true language about certainty', (Jorgensen, 2006, p. 5). The assumption here's that every word has its own meaning which meaning is in conjunction with the expression. Augustine's work in Confession's follows this idea, and shows that there is absolutely no difference between sorts of words. However, Wittgenstein now proposes that is an extremely primitive way of perceiving how language functions. In Philosophical Investigations, he uses the example of 'five red apples' and questions how the shopkeeper knows how to proceed with the three words when no such question of this is of the words arrived to thought. These primitive kinds of language are being used by children when they are understanding how to discuss. The ostensive coaching of words is utilized to instruct children a primitive words; it allows those to connect between an object and a expression. To determine different understandings using ostensive teaching, another form of training would need to be used for that particular use of the term. For instance, a button, one is utilized on a computer to switch it on or off, another is utilized to open doorways within a building and a 3rd is a button on a cardigan, which links the material. 'The point is the fact that words do not have only one so this means and that there surely is no one single feature that characterizes one term' (Jorgensen, 2006, p. 6), resulting in the assumption that words are polysemic. By looking at Terms in terms of multiple meanings we can see that words is not an 'isolated phenomena' (Jorgensen, 2006) but something that is dependent on the activities that we experienced and just how human players perceive things.

Wittgenstein describes vocabulary as an ancient city: 'a maze of little roadways and squares, of old and new houses, and of houses with improvements from various periods; and this encircled by a multitude of new boroughs with in a straight line regular roadways and uniform houses' (Wittgenstein, 1958, p. 18). This price describes how Wittgenstein perceives language and shows that language is not long lasting, but something that is continually changing with customs. It also details how new terminology games enter into life whilst others become overlooked. The change occurring however is always dependent on background and the contextual guidelines of the overall game. This offer also contributes to Wittgenstein having the ability to clarify that no phrase has a definitive meaning and therefore there is absolutely no common substance that characterises vocabulary (Jorgensen, 2006). So that it can be said that vocabulary games do not all have something in keeping, nonetheless they are connected by 'family resemblance', a rule of language video games. This concept, created by Wittgenstein, is a metaphor expressing that languages all look as well just as family members do. 'We visit a complicated network of similarities overlapping and criss-crossing: sometimes overall similarities, sometimes similarities of aspect' (Wittgenstein, 1958, p. 66). Thus dialect is called terms because they are similar or look as well, just like organisations. As there is absolutely no essential core of an word, to discover a meaning for a term, one should research different uses of the word; this common factor is the family resemblance.

The Private Vs Public Language debate is a subject which Wittgenstein devotes a portion of Philosophical Investigations to. Wittgenstein believes in a open public language which private games do not seem sensible. 'The individual words of the terms are to make reference to what can only be known to the person speaking; to his immediate private feelings. So someone else cannot understand the vocabulary' (Wittgenstein, 1958). Even though private language activities are real for individuals, the phrase can be an oxymoron as it means ensuring the rules of the overall game are being followed which is an impossible task as the rules are indefinable. The idea of a private dialect means our company is limited in what we say, as we can not express all of our experience, for example only one can know when they are in pain, no-one else can reveal that pain, they can only experience the description of the given pain. A general public language is needed otherwise we would not have the ability to communicate in society which means goal of open public terminology is communication between human players.

Alongside language games are knowing and doubting video games, these games relate to uncertainty in terms. Wittgenstein uses the exemplory case of 'here is one side' (Wittgenstein, 1979), this ostensive description is making an empirical say that allows us to make sense of things. If humans were to question that a hand exists then we would make very little sense of terminology. Wittgenstein shows that a proposition such as 'here is a hands' must be looked at in framework or it could by meaningless. We take these types of propositions for granted and must accept that these sorts of propositions shouldn't be doubted or questioned. In each words game played, the rules of the overall game may be doubted if they're unclear or indefinite. In On Certainty, Wittgenstein compares these types of propositions to a river foundation, and inside a river the river foundation must stay in place rather than be doubted to allow the river of vocabulary to flow efficiently through it, (Sparknotes, 2012). Knowing and certainty website link together as if you propose that you know something, you must be sure of computer, for if you aren't certain of a fact then you cannot be certain of the meaning of the words you are using either. To state you understand something cleans away the doubt from the dialect game. However we should have a degree of certainty within the vocabulary games to seem sensible and agree on things.

One of the overall goals of Wittgenstein's Language games is never to solve philosophical problems but to dissolve them. For instance although he criticises Augustine's theory of pointing and naming things, he will not attempt to replace it with another theory of vocabulary but he desires us to see that we do not need a theory to describe the link between vocabulary and certainty. Another goal of vocabulary games is to permit us to see earlier misleading pictures that our civilizations complicate through communication, and therefore by using a public words and understanding the rules of the video games we ought to understand more about words.

A second theorist is Foucault who's known for his focus on discourse which concerns the processing of knowledge through vocabulary (Hall, 1997). For him, a main reason for his work 'is to show how individuals in today's are subordinated by particular discourses or vocabulary games' (Jorgensen, 2006, p. 19). He thinks that in modern day organisations electric power is embedded in the guidelines of language video games and regulates and manages how the games are played. For instance, when we commence a fresh job, we are taught by professionals who control and limit how much we realize about the business and what we can do within the company through the energy they may have within the work area. Having this authoritative tone of voice allows them to judge others. This suggests that the main element players in Foucault's terminology games are experts: teachers, managers, doctors, Politian's and jail guards. These professionals create the norms of culture and create docile physiques within institutions so the physiques are controllable. One of the guidelines that Foucault pertains to language games is that non-appropriate subject areas are disregarded within a discourse, for example within a meeting in an company it would be appropriate to discuss profit and damage not what you are doing at the weekend.

The pros within institutions use things as control mechanisms. Examples of they are timetables and the panoptican. The timetable can be an object inside a words game as they notify people where you can go at particular times e. g. the vocabulary that is written on the timetable control buttons the daily routine of a stock worker; they have set times to begin work, have breaks and finish work. Another subject is the panoptican is a vertical form of monitoring and produces self monitoring of people through fear. These things of language video games are there to maintain the video games and enforce rules on the individuals and within each of these objects there are different guidelines to different language video games. Leading on from this 'for Foucault one of many makes shaping our experience is dialect. . . We not only use language to make clear ideas and feelings to others, we put it to use to explain things to ourselves' (Danaher, 2000, p. 31). This proposes that everything we do is ornamented or affected by terms, written or spoken. By influencing everything we do shows how powerful vocabulary can be.

Knowledge and electric power are not viewed as negative aspects and are produced by episteme which also holds them together. Matching to Foucault 'domains of knowledge and relations of vitality are intrinsically tied together, and this important intertwinement is what's described by that hybrid vitality/knowledge' (Oksala, 2007, p. 48). This cross types is possessed by the professionals within culture, they normalise and enforce what should be considered as knowledge. For instance when we go to work, we generally agree to what the manager says us to be true and do not question their understanding of the business or job that requires doing. This causes the conclusion that fact and knowledge will be the result of clinical discourse and this Electric power and knowledge are key in terminology as they reinforce truth. It's the goal of terms games to condition knowledge and electric power relations through episteme, this is actually the mega game which makes all other video games possible.

Derrida is another philosopher who may have studied terminology and the video games that humans play. Derrida believes that people should check out process rather than the framework of things. 'So profound does structure run in our mental habits that whenever we try to analyse process we turn it into framework. Derrida's job has been to reverse this predilection and show that process is principal to composition' (Cooper, 1989, p. 480). This shows that we naturally go through the structure of things and not the process of how they happen, by looking at the process allows us to make more sense of things. Derrida thinks that humans are the players within his dialect games of deconstruction and differnce.

Derrida's views of discourse examination are exhibited through deconstruction, this refers to leaving buildings towards a processual way so that one can see and grapple with natural contradictions. Undecidability is employed to make clear deconstruction through considering binary opposites e. g. high/low and supervisor/employee. This brings about the assumption these terms cannot are present without one another as without them they might not make sense; a common exemplory case of this is Schrodingers Pet cat in the package. Derrida uses the term logocentrism within his work, by this he meant that language is merely a mechanism that communicates thoughts. This is a difficulty for deconstruction as it is confronted with the issue of how to open up a words 'without simply endorsing the wider platform to which its conditions belong' (Real wood, 1987, p. 32). To prevent this occurring Derrida employs overturning and metahporization. They are operations of deconstruction which allow us to check out language as the product of indicating through diffrence and dissemination.

Diffrence comes from Saussure's concept of 'signs or symptoms' which is an important idea to Derrida's view of process. Differnce embodies two meanings which govern the creation of so this means; diffrer can mean to be deferred or to are different in space. Differed relates to Derrida's Semiotics. 'A signal and its meaning are both users of diachronic or temporal group of that signs or symptoms occurrences and the simultaneous patter of this related to symptoms in terms. The mention of both these is essential to the indications meaning. The meaning of each signal is in accordance with this combo of present and absent symptoms' (Cahoone, 2012). Which means that signs can be regarded in two ways, the foremost is by looking at the historical avenue of the word, the second is by looking at what other signs or symptoms are related to it. For instance when we research a expression in the dictionary it leads us another so this means of a term, it is an endless string of meanings, i. e. signals are polysemic. Out of this, leads us to one of Derrida's rules of terminology 'there is not a outside of the wording', by this he means 'there is no access to the real world except through dialect' (Bennett, 2004, p. 30), therefore there cannot be any interpretation outside context because there is nothing we realize or have experienced that isn't in context. The second meaning - to differ in space, relates 'to a differentiation which he also terms 'spacing' and which stops any indication from getting a self-enclosed identity', (Deutscher, 2005, p. 31). This suggests that a fixed so this means of a term cannot exist and a sign can have more than one identity predicated on the context in which it is positioned, for example the word 'organisation' has different meanings depending on context in which it is being used.

The above links to the objects of language video games, in terms of Derrida's work they will be the meanings of symptoms, and having already concluded there is no one interpretation to a sign, the purpose of Derrida's game is to therefore check out meanings or rules of indicators and attempt to understand them by stabilising the rules. To do this human's must have experience in the framework of the indication they want to understand and the meaning they come to will be based on past activities of this.

It is clear that evaluations can be produced between the writers on their theories of language games. Firstly, a comparison in Wittgenstein and Derrida's work. Wittgenstein suggests that language games should be enjoyed through speech and his work reflects this, however Derrida proposes that language games should maintain the form of writing. Although both theorists do acknowledge the idea of multiple meanings as they both think that words/signs own an indefinite range of meanings with regards to the context in which the word has been used. Another comparison is between Foucault and Wittgenstein who both think that we have been constrained by our terms and that people can only just speak predicated on the language we've experienced, this links with private words games. Your final comparison is of Derrida and Foucault who both use timetables in their work to spell it out forms of control through dialect.

By using the work of most three theorists I feel that organisations can be identified in conditions of language game titles. Organisations can be referred to using Wittgenstein's and Derrida's theories of multiple meanings in this way as when problems take place new solutions are found, however these solutions come with more problems so it is an limitless cycle where no one solution will solve a challenge, just like there is no one so this means of a word, this relates to Tamara, an endless story. A family resemblance may also be used to spell it out an organisation as although they do look the same, there are vital dissimilarities between each company, such as management set ups and shift patterns. Also by using the private language argument, each individual in a organisation will have had different experiences of their job role, and therefore they cannot communicate all their thoughts as there will never be a common public language all the time, this also links to Tamara as each individual experience is unique. Using Derrida and Foucault's example of a timetable within words game titles is another way of interpreting an company, as it is something that can be used everyday in a company, such as specifically timed meal breaks and clocking in cards. This form of self applied surveillance is governed by words from managers and superiors within the company. In addition, consistent with Derrida's work, it is important to check out organisations in terms of arenas of operations and to look at the outcomes, not take a look at them as constructions. Finally Foucault's players in a language will be the professionals. In a organisation they are the managers which is their voices that set the rules of the dialect game within that organisation i. e. we agree to what they say as the reality because of the ability and knowledge that the administrator has. In conclusion if organisations were to be looked at in terms of text it would allow us to interpret organisations in another way to check out different ways of handling problems. This linguistic convert is a way of using content material as a metaphor to provide us the correct tools to use in organisations.

  • More than 7,000 students prefer us to work on their projects
  • 90% of customers trust us with more than 5 assignments
submit a project

Latest posts

Read more informative topics on our blog
Shiseido Company Limited Is A Japanese Makeup Company Marketing Essay
Marketing Strength: Among the main talents of Shiseido is its high quality products. To be able to satisfy customers, the company invested a great deal...
Fail To Plan You Plan To Fail Management Essay
Management This report will concentrate on two aspects of project management, their importance within the overall project management process. The report...
Role of High-protein Diet in Weight Management
Nursing Structured Representation: Probably one of the most wide-spread and popular problems on earth is the weight problems that people is suffering...
Waste To Prosperity Program Environmental Sciences Essay
Environmental Sciences Urban and rural regions of India produce very much garbage daily and hurting by various kinds of pollutions which are increasing...
Environmental Studies Pollution Introduction Many people across the world can remember having walked on the street and seen smoke cigars in the air or...
Soft System Methodology
Information Technology Andrzej Werner Soft System Methodology can be described as a 7-step process aimed to help provide a solution to true to life...
Strategic and Coherent methods to Recruiting management
Business Traditionally HRM has been regarded as the tactical and coherent method of the management of the organizations most appreciated assets - the...
Religious Healthcare Organisation
Health Religious Health Care Introduction I help the firm of consulting. Spiritual HEALTHCARE of Middleville community have appointed us to identify and...
Enterprise Rent AN AUTOMOBILE Case Analysis Business Essay
Commerce With a massive network of over 6,000 local rental locations and 850,000 automobiles, Organization Rent-A-Car is the greatest rental car company...
Check the price
for your project
we accept
Money back
100% quality