Matt w already talked about Wittgensteinian family resemblance concepts, so now I’ll talk about Prototype theory.
When we’re talking about what is IF or what is a game or what is fiction we’re talking about categorisation. Prototype theory says there is very strong evidence that we humans usually don’t categorise things according to definitions with a list of essentials, but instead by comparing them to prototypical members of that category. There are marginal members in every category, but they do not constitute what the prototype is.
I’d like to propose the following Natural Semantic Metalanguage explication for game:
[code]X is a game:
- Sometimes people do an activity:
2. This activity is not an essential part of their lives
3. The outcome of this activity is not known ahead of time to these people
4. These people influence the outcome of this activity
5. These people feel something good while they are doing this - X is like this activity[/code]
The like in the last line is where all the prototypical magic happens: it means that game X can be favourably compared to the prototypical game, while still allowing differences. However the more differences there are, the more marginal the member is in the category.
Now I only spent a couple of minutes thinking about what a prototypical game is and my explication could do with some work.