Philosophy Now Forum

Posted: **Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm**

if one looks at the animal world/nature.. we see that
many animals play.. as do humans.. it is universal acknowledged that
human children must play to become human adults..
yet play in adults is dismissed as childish, not a serious
activity... but we consider work to be serious, as something
worth doing for over 40 years and yet, we don't consider play
as being worthwhile... if one looks at all the other animals,
that play, as does humans, that seems to suggest that play,
has the evolutionary seal of approval, but does work have that
same evolutionary seal of approval? we see animals playing,
but do we see any animals working? this evolutionary approval
seems to make play more important than work.. if so, then
why do we take work far more seriously than play?
why work in fact? there doesn't seem to be anything evolutionary
in work, but play does have the evolution seal of approval....

why work when there are easier ways to fulfill our primary needs of
food, water, shelter?

so, what makes work a primary activity of human beings and not of animals?
and the other question about play is this, as we grow older, our
play becomes more organized... we turn to sports to play...
I ran cross-country and track in high school, I taught swimming,
I played softball, I backpacked through Kings Canyon and Yosemite...
all versions of play... I even tried golf, hated it... as I am unable to play
anymore, my body ain't what it used to be, I watch a great deal of
sports, play... and we human beings will spend a great deal of time, trouble,
effort and money to watch others play sports... next week will be the
Super Bowl... where the 49's play KC.. go niners....
that is practically a national holiday... and in some ways, we have
taken the play out of sports by treating it as something serious...
we bet millions of dollars on sports, and we watch hour long programs
on sports, ESPN...people, a whole lot of people make their living on
some aspect of sports, on play....
by bringing money into play, we have taken sports/play and turn it
into something serious... now, I am not questioning the financial
aspect of sports/play, but I am suggesting that we have lost something
in sports/play by monetizing it... by taking a great athlete like Steph
Curry and bringing into basketball, his beauty and grace and sheer
ability, and that is all wonderful, but then someone, today its me,
that will note that Curry makes $51.9 million dollars a year, playing
basketball....playing sports... and does that information, add to or
subtract from our enjoyment of basketball?

and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

so, I ask, do you play and what value does that play have for you?
and is there more of a need to think about or discuss play/sports
in our lives?

Kropotkin

Posted: **Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:26 pm**

in thinking about it, we spend a great deal more time
and effort on sports/play then we do at philosophy....
there are some/many who spend hours a day thinking about
sports/play and many spend a great deal of effort becoming
better at sports... think of what would happen if we transfered
that time and effort from sports into philosophy or even just plain
old thinking? does philosophy offer us the same benefits that
play/sport do? does philosophy get the same amount of
attention as does sports/play? and we all know the answer to
these questions... it isn't a mystery that sports dominates
our lives in a way that philosophy never will.... and is this good/bad/
or indifferent?

Kropotkin

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:42 am**

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

Corruption of sports in order to simply win, means corrupting fair and square, and corrupting the rules. Much like the Democrat Party That Hates America does in politics, with more significant implications.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 4:32 am**

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:42 am
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?
It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

What can be clearly seen here is how some had been so abused, when so-called 'growing up', then they actually started believing that 'playing' was about 'winning' and/or 'losing', and that one must obey by adult human being created 'rules'.

Some, very unfortunately, even believed that any 'game of Life' was also about 'winning' and 'losing'.

Adult human beings really had devolved that much, or sunk that low, back in the 'ancient days' when this was being written.

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:42 am Corruption of sports in order to simply win, means corrupting fair and square, and corrupting the rules. Much like the Democrat Party That Hates America does in politics, with more significant implications.

Also, what can even be more clearly seen here is how these ones would say just about absolutely anything at all in the hope that 'those words' will somehow back up and support what they 'currently' believed was true, in some way at all.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:40 am**

Walker:
It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

K: and if the goal is to win, then what do rules matter? the point is not to
play by the rules but to win... and we know that following the rules
interferes with winning....so the real question is winning the actual point
or is playing by the rules the point?

W: Corruption of sports in order to simply win, means corrupting fair and square, and corrupting the rules. Much like the Democrat Party That Hates America does in politics, with more significant implications.

K: OK, major leap in logic, and understanding of the op in question...
How do we jump from work/play to the '"Democratic party that hates
America, does in politics, with more significant implications""

I don't suppose asking for any kind of facts or evidence would be too much
to ask for? for example, as a democrat, I don't hate America, thus
you are wrong in your statement.... you may say, I said the Democratic
party.....but once again, how about some evidence or facts that backs up your
claims? in what actions/or speech ''proves'' that the democratic party
hates America?

Kropotkin

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:08 am**

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm if one looks at the animal world/nature.. we see that
many animals play.. as do humans.. it is universal acknowledged that
human children must play to become human adults..
yet play in adults is dismissed as childish, not a serious
activity... but we consider work to be serious, as something
worth doing for over 40 years and yet, we don't consider play
as being worthwhile... if one looks at all the other animals,
that play, as does humans, that seems to suggest that play,
has the evolutionary seal of approval, but does work have that
same evolutionary seal of approval? we see animals playing,
but do we see any animals working? this evolutionary approval
seems to make play more important than work.. if so, then
why do we take work far more seriously than play?
why work in fact? there doesn't seem to be anything evolutionary
in work, but play does have the evolution seal of approval....

why work when there are easier ways to fulfill our primary needs of
food, water, shelter?

so, what makes work a primary activity of human beings and not of animals?
and the other question about play is this, as we grow older, our
play becomes more organized... we turn to sports to play...
I ran cross-country and track in high school, I taught swimming,
I played softball, I backpacked through Kings Canyon and Yosemite...
all versions of play... I even tried golf, hated it... as I am unable to play
anymore, my body ain't what it used to be, I watch a great deal of
sports, play... and we human beings will spend a great deal of time, trouble,
effort and money to watch others play sports... next week will be the
Super Bowl... where the 49's play KC.. go niners....
that is practically a national holiday... and in some ways, we have
taken the play out of sports by treating it as something serious...
we bet millions of dollars on sports, and we watch hour long programs
on sports, ESPN...people, a whole lot of people make their living on
some aspect of sports, on play....
by bringing money into play, we have taken sports/play and turn it
into something serious... now, I am not questioning the financial
aspect of sports/play, but I am suggesting that we have lost something
in sports/play by monetizing it... by taking a great athlete like Steph
Curry and bringing into basketball, his beauty and grace and sheer
ability, and that is all wonderful, but then someone, today its me,
that will note that Curry makes $51.9 million dollars a year, playing
basketball....playing sports... and does that information, add to or
subtract from our enjoyment of basketball?

and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

so, I ask, do you play and what value does that play have for you?
and is there more of a need to think about or discuss play/sports
in our lives?

Kropotkin

Playing has important functions, it also depends how we interpret it. The poorest meaning is considering that animals play to prepare themselves to deal with life, challenges, difficulties, relationships. We can find deeper meanings of playing, especially if we consider that we can also play musical instruments. This way we discover that playing, including sports, is a language, an instrument to communicate with each other about creativity, exploring new perspectives. This way it becomes clear that we humans invented work to have more time to play, despite the final result being the opposite. I think that Hermann Hesse's novel "The glass bead game" is essential to explore playing as the essence of life and spirituality. In this perspective we can say that all existence can be interpreted as a game. Think also about Wittgenstein's concept of language games. So, we can even say that being is playing, even working is just a different game, life is a game a serious and important game. In other words, playing is an extremely useful hermeneutics to interpret existence and its meaning. We can even say that we are played by life, by existence, by spirituality, we are musical instruments of life. We can play ideas as they were musical instruments and this way we can make philosophy, art, spirituality.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 10:45 am**

Angelo Cannata wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:08 am
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm if one looks at the animal world/nature.. we see that
many animals play.. as do humans.. it is universal acknowledged that
human children must play to become human adults..
yet play in adults is dismissed as childish, not a serious
activity... but we consider work to be serious, as something
worth doing for over 40 years and yet, we don't consider play
as being worthwhile... if one looks at all the other animals,
that play, as does humans, that seems to suggest that play,
has the evolutionary seal of approval, but does work have that
same evolutionary seal of approval? we see animals playing,
but do we see any animals working? this evolutionary approval
seems to make play more important than work.. if so, then
why do we take work far more seriously than play?
why work in fact? there doesn't seem to be anything evolutionary
in work, but play does have the evolution seal of approval....

why work when there are easier ways to fulfill our primary needs of
food, water, shelter?

so, what makes work a primary activity of human beings and not of animals?
and the other question about play is this, as we grow older, our
play becomes more organized... we turn to sports to play...
I ran cross-country and track in high school, I taught swimming,
I played softball, I backpacked through Kings Canyon and Yosemite...
all versions of play... I even tried golf, hated it... as I am unable to play
anymore, my body ain't what it used to be, I watch a great deal of
sports, play... and we human beings will spend a great deal of time, trouble,
effort and money to watch others play sports... next week will be the
Super Bowl... where the 49's play KC.. go niners....
that is practically a national holiday... and in some ways, we have
taken the play out of sports by treating it as something serious...
we bet millions of dollars on sports, and we watch hour long programs
on sports, ESPN...people, a whole lot of people make their living on
some aspect of sports, on play....
by bringing money into play, we have taken sports/play and turn it
into something serious... now, I am not questioning the financial
aspect of sports/play, but I am suggesting that we have lost something
in sports/play by monetizing it... by taking a great athlete like Steph
Curry and bringing into basketball, his beauty and grace and sheer
ability, and that is all wonderful, but then someone, today its me,
that will note that Curry makes $51.9 million dollars a year, playing
basketball....playing sports... and does that information, add to or
subtract from our enjoyment of basketball?

and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

so, I ask, do you play and what value does that play have for you?
and is there more of a need to think about or discuss play/sports
in our lives?

AC: I think that Hermann Hesse's novel "The glass bead game" is essential to explore playing as the essence of life and spirituality. In this perspective we can say that all existence can be interpreted as a game. Think also about Wittgenstein's concept of language games. So, we can even say that being is playing, even working is just a different game, life is a game a serious and important game.

K: The statement I wish to wonder about is the last statement...
that ''life is a game, a serious and important game"

I have noticed that people get awfully worked up about things in life,
making them way more serious than they really are.... most of the things
people get really worked up about, don't matter much... money, fame,
titles, material possessions, power.. none of those things matter much...
for they are all temporary... and not one of them bring us anything
that has any value... for fame can only bring us fame and money
can only bring us money and titles are pointless and material possessions,
well, we spend a lot of money on things we get rid of 3 years later....
a lot of people think that all they need is to get rich and all their
problems will be solved....nah... it ain't so... my car broke down
last night and I am bringing it into the shop this morning... it won't be
cheap.... but it is a minor, at best, an inconvenience... not the end of the
world.... which leads us to the crux of the problem.... context...

we lack context or perspective on things... what seems to be important,
quite often isn't and what seems to be minor, is quite often, is much more
important than we think...as a young man, I never worried about my
health... and these days, as an old man, my health impacts me virtually
every single day, and not positively....I have health issues that will only
get worse, not better....not to be too blunt, but getting old sucks...
and we don't even think about that when we are young...it was not
important and yet, today, it has become increasingly the most important
thing in my life...which is a long way of saying what was important,
often changes as we grow older...our viewpoint, our perspective changes
as we age... what was serious becomes a joke... work for example,
and what was not very important, becomes very important....

and as far as Hesse goes, I have read all his novels.. 40 years ago, granted,
but I found, for myself anyway, he gets one all excited about the coming
answers to his questions and he never does give us an answer to his
questions... both in Siddhartha and Steppenwolf.. he teases us with
the questions asked, but he never answers them... just teases us....
I was left unfulfilled reading him..... it seemed to be very important but
we never got an answer to his questions... maybe it due time for me
to reread Hesse?

Kropotkin

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 12:45 pm**

Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:40 am Walker:
It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

K: and if the goal is to win, then what do rules matter? the point is not to
play by the rules but to win... and we know that following the rules
interferes with winning....so the real question is winning the actual point
or is playing by the rules the point?

No, you missed the point.

The point of sports is to play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.
If you just play to win, and ignore the rules, you are corrupting sports.

Can't say it any plainer, and yet you still insist on misinterpreting.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 4:51 pm**

The OP misses the important point that what separates "work" from "play" isn't the nature of the activity, it is the autonomy of play vs the compensation of work. Thus Pro basketball players don't play, basketball is their work.

Identical to the difference between a gardener and a landscaper.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:02 pm**

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:42 am
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

…Much like the Democrat Party That Hates America does in politics, with more significant implications.

Walker, you’re obsessed.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:13 pm**

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 12:45 pm
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:40 am Walker:
It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

K: and if the goal is to win, then what do rules matter? the point is not to
play by the rules but to win... and we know that following the rules
interferes with winning....so the real question is winning the actual point
or is playing by the rules the point?
No, you missed the point.

The point of sports is to play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.
If you just play to win, and ignore the rules, you are corrupting sports.

Can't say it any plainer, and yet you still insist on misinterpreting.

Right-oh, Walker. If the rules of a given game of sports are ignored, the sport is so corrupted that it is no longer the given game. For example, if the rules of basketball are ignored, the game of basketball is not being played. With no sporting rules in place whatsoever, I imagine the game would be called WWIII.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:53 pm**

Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 12:45 pm
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:40 am Walker:
It's a pretty simple philosophy. Play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.

K: and if the goal is to win, then what do rules matter? the point is not to
play by the rules but to win... and we know that following the rules
interferes with winning....so the real question is winning the actual point
or is playing by the rules the point?
No, you missed the point.

The point of sports is to play to win, fair and square, according to the rules.
If you just play to win, and ignore the rules, you are corrupting sports.

K: and the problem here is these words: ''you are corrupting sports''

I am not god and thus I don't have a birds eye view of what ''corruption''
looks like.. is that all it takes to ''corrupt sports'', to ignore the rules?
and does that mean in life, the concept of corruption in government,
or in politics or in bribing a border official, is the entire concept of
corruption about ignoring the rules? I think that is a skewed look at
corruption... I think corruption involves in more than just ''ignoring the rules''
having played sports until I was 45 (physical problems ended my days of sports)
ignoring the rules is a small part of corruption... and an easily fixed problem..
what I suspect is the corruption of sports comes from, and what corrupts virtually
everything it touches and that is money...

there isn't anything that money can't corrupt or destroy... and that
comes from the fact that we have faith in money before all else...
we pray to mammon, not to god... we hold to the faith of money...
and that money will solve all our problems....

if you want to end corruption in anything, begin with money...

Kropotkin

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:10 pm**

Some rules are intrinsic to the game; others are artificially imposed. In the days of Olympic and NCAA amateurism, for example, there were rules about taking money for promotions and advertising. Those rules (unlike the rules of basketball) are not intrinsic to the game, and whatever we think about breaking them, the game is not spoiled by those who do. Even rules about performance enhancing drugs are not intrinsic to the game. The outrage surrounding their use is exacerbated by people who think winning and losing is the essence of sport.

Sports always appealed to me because they are unimportant. People (not me, but many people) actually think that making lots of money or being "born again" (or whatever) is some sort measure of human value. I disagree. The desire to win is necessary to maximize one's enjoyment of sport, but actual winning is not important. The play itself is where we derive enjoyment. I'm in my university's athletic Hall of Fame, but accolades like that are simply silly and irrelevant. The fun is in pure play. I had just as much fun playing pick-up hockey (my best sport, although I played almost all of them) as playing in college games.

Unfortunately, age and sports injuries (I now have one bad knee and one artificial ones) have derailed my athletic ability (although I still play golf and bicycle and go mountaineering). I miss it. I miss taking something so insignificant seriously. Some might see philosophy the same way; it's an enjoyable game and nothing more.

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:27 pm**

when I was in high school, a million years ago, I ran cross-country
and track... I wasn't particular good and I wasn't going to win any races,
although as a junior, I actually won a race or two in cross-country...
anyway, my goal wasn't to win, but to improve my times... in track,
my goal was to go from a 4:55 mile to a 4:53 or even 4:50 mile...
I ran to improve my times... not to win...and I enjoyed running..
miss it to this day... I wasn't going to make any money and it didn't even
get me into a college, as it sometimes does, no, I just ran because
I like to run....and there was nothing to corrupt here.. just
the fun of running...

Kropotkin

Posted: **Tue Feb 06, 2024 6:36 pm**

commonsense wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 5:02 pm
Walker wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2024 3:42 am
Peter Kropotkin wrote: ↑Sun Feb 04, 2024 1:19 pm and we must ask, of ourselves and of others, is there a need for or
the desire for a ''philosophy of play/sport?"... we have an area
called the ''philosophy of science'', so why not a philosophy of play/sports?

…Much like the Democrat Party That Hates America does in politics, with more significant implications.
Walker, you’re obsessed.

No, you have a delusional view of reality, despite the wistfulness of your moniker.

You should accurately Call it ... Variations on a Theme, Composed in Real Time, by Walker.
Yes. That has a certain ring to it. Listen ... it's the ring of truth, or vibration if your prefer. Walker approves.

I ask you, what other themes unfolding in real time reality can We All Together Now objectively source, so easily, as politics?

Especially since the War Between Good And Evil has never been in such sharp focus, as it now is, thanks to The Democrat Party That Hates America.

*

Loosen up. Just admit the truth ... And Play!

Philosophy Now Forum

work and play?

work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?

Re: work and play?