Steve writes:
< It seems like an elaboration of "constraint provides form"? >
Here I'll admit I just have no interest in games, puzzles, and most sports.
Just what IS the point?
I think it is the same kind of psychology at work: Let's create some
artificial thing that can be mastered or at least measured and that a group can
all relate to in an straightforward way. For reasons I just can't get my head
around, people just love this stuff. Playing by the rules is a Good Thing,
whereas finding the weaknesses in a set of rules (e.g. hacking or using
yet-to-be-identified performance enhancing drugs) is a Bad Thing.
Manipulating a market is a bad thing, but gaming it is Good Thing.
What? The form is JUST a social form, not a universal form. If the system is
to be cheated shall elect an authoritarian to do it. (Nixon replies, "Well,
when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal.") Duh.
< The admonition that liberals engage too much in "identity politics" is
probably an exposure of this difference. Taking up the cause of those
who are *superficially* different from me in *similar ways* is one way
for me to expand my scope of identity and empathy. >
What I'm pitching here is not to extend identity, but to annihilate it.
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
archives back to 2003: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
