Book | Chapter

Game semantics has almost achieved the status of a paradigm in computer science but philosophers are slow to take notice. One reason for this might be the lack of a convincing philosophical account of logical games, what it means to play them, for the proponent to win, etc., pointedly raised by Wilfrid Hodges as the "Dawkins question". In this paper, I critically examine two available answers: after a brief discussion of an argument by Tennant against Hintikka games, I focus on Lorenzen's attempt at providing a direct foundation for his game rules in the life-world, showing some of the difficulties inherent to that project. I then propose an alternative based on the theory of assertions developed by Dummett and Brandom.

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9374-6_1

Full citation: