Tuesday, August 26, 2008

Reading for play

Play seems to not only exist in cultured people or "beings" but it exists in most every living thing. Part of the article referring to a "universal" thing could be put in to a Literal term. Perhaps it could refer to every life form existing in the universe. Another question that i asked from the article.. can beings be to smart to play? Does the worlds greatest scientist not play when he does his experiments? I think play can include every living thing in our universe and i would imagine any one or any thing that is kept away from play or denies it is in for a very boring life. The offensive part of the article for most people (It didn't offend me, I'm not religious) However but the comparison to religion is a bad comparison for a simple fact that people choose to believe religion because they believe it to be truth not to take part in it because they want to escape reality. 

1 comment:

Rose Marshack said...

I really like that you have asked your own questions from this reading - I wonder if the world's greatest scientist does play the same way as, say, the world's greatest athlete? How would their definitions of play be different?

Actually there is was a great scientist named Richard Feynman who has many books written about what a playful guy he was. They are quite entertaining.

You also noted that some people might find the comparison of play to religion offensive, and that might be because some people don't equate "truth" with "play."