The idea the author seems to try to hint at is what i would call a Functor if we were talking about Categories:
- Language games have structure
- Structures can be compared by correspondences/functions
- A particular concept in one language game therefore could be transported along such a correspondence into another language game.
- We don't have a good correspondence between the language games of biology and physics that allows us to transport "life" from biology to physics.
- Or do we!???
P.S. It occurs to me that my analogy with categories and functors is itself a transport between the language game of category theory and the language game of language games.
> It occurs to me that my analogy with categories and functors is itself a transport between the language game of category theory and the language game of language games.
Bahahahahaha! Brilliant.
If I remember my category theory correctly, wouldn't this mean that you've discovered a Monad between the language game of category theory and the language game of language games?
If so, we could create the most incomprehensible monad tutorial yet written! Now there's a real achievement.
- Language games have structure
- Structures can be compared by correspondences/functions
- A particular concept in one language game therefore could be transported along such a correspondence into another language game.
- We don't have a good correspondence between the language games of biology and physics that allows us to transport "life" from biology to physics.
- Or do we!???
P.S. It occurs to me that my analogy with categories and functors is itself a transport between the language game of category theory and the language game of language games.