system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Correct me if I'm wrong on Wittgenstein (I'm wrong)

What exactly does he mean by "language games"? Is it the claim that in inquiry, all participants need to have the same or similar experiences in traditions as well as fundamental beliefs (ie God exists for religious discourse, or reason can tell us about the universe in science) and as a result it makes no sense to base criticisms in science to attack religion because you'd be using language structures that make sense in science but make no sense in religion?
gpt
Wittgenstein uses the concept of a game to explain the idea of family resemblance. A set of things have a family resemblance if there are certain features which connect them, but no set of necessary and sufficient conditions shared by all. The people a a family reunion will not share any single feature which they all have, and no one else does. However, some will have the same nose, some will have the same eyes, some will have some of the same mannerisms the same, and so forth. These common links will ultimately connect all the members of the family.

A language game is some part of a language (where a whole language can be considered a limiting case), considered in association with the things which are done with it. Wittgenstein's point is that we do different things with language, and how we should go about trying to understand a certain statement depends upon what we would normally be doing with this statement. The upshot is Wittgenstein wants to reject the project of offering a logical analysis for all language.

On "Lectures on Religious Belief" says that an atheist can deny what the religious person says, but cannot really contradict it. Wittgenstein seems to think this means the statements as uttered by the religious person function differently that the statements as uttered by the non-religious person.

That leans a bit in the direction of what you're saying.