PDA

View Full Version : Sapiens are fulfilled only in play


coberst
04-13-2007, 02:46 AM
Sapiens are fulfilled only in play

Properly understood, Freud’s doctrine of infantile Xuality is a scientific formulation and reaffirmation of the fact that childhood innocence, as displayed in their delight with their body, remains wo/man’s indestructible unconscious goal.

Children on one hand pursue pleasure and on the other hand are active in that pursuit. A child’s pleasure is in the active pursuit of the life of the human body. What then are we adults to learn from the pursuits of childhood? The answer is that children play.

“Play is the essential character of activity governed by the pleasure-principle rather than the reality-principle. Play is ‘purposeless yet in some sense meaningful’…play is the erotic mode of activity. Play is that activity which, in the delight of life, unites man with the objects of his love, as is indeed evident from the role of play in normal adult genital activity…the ultimate essence of our being is erotic and demands activity according to the pleasure-principle.”

As a religious ideal childhood innocence has resisted assimilation into rational-theological tradition. Although there is a biblical statement that says something to the effect that unless you become children you cannot go to heaven, this admonition has affected primarily only mystics. However, poets have grasped this meaning in its philosophic-rational terms.

In his “Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man” Schiller says that “Man only plays when in the full meaning of the word he is a man, and he is only completely a man when he plays.” Sartre says “As soon as a man apprehends himself as free and wishes to use his freedom...then his activity is play.”

H. H. Brinton, modern American archaeologist, considers the essence of man is purposeful activity generated by desire. The perfect goal generated activity is play. Play expresses life in its fullest. Play as an end, as a goal, means that life itself has intrinsic value. Adam and Eve succumbed when their play became serious business.

Jacob Boehme, a German Christian mystic, concluded that wo/man’s perfection and bliss resided not in religion but in joyful play.

John Maynard Keynes noted modern economist, takes the premise that modern technology will solve wo/man’s need to work and thereby lead to a general “nervous breakdown”. He thinks we already experience a manifestation of this syndrome when we observe the unfortunate wives of wealthy men who have lost meaning in this driving and ambitious world of economic progress. He says “There is no country and no people who can look forward to the age of leisure and abundance without dread.”

From the Keynesian point of view it will be a difficult task to transfer our ambitions from acquiring wealth to that of playing. But for Freud this change is not as difficult because beneath the habits of work acquired by all wo/men lay an immortal instinct for play.

Huizinga, a noted anthropologist, testifies to the presence of a nonfunctional element of play in all of the basic categories of our sapient cultural activity—religion, art, law, economics, etc. He further concludes that advanced civilization has disguised this element of play and thereby dehumanized culture.

The author, Norman Brown, concludes that psychoanalysis have added to these expressed statements regarding the importance of “The play element in culture provides a prima facie justification for the psychoanalytic doctrine of sublimation, which views ‘higher’ cultural activities as substitutes for infantile pleasures.”

Quotes from “Life against Death” by Norman Brown

Bill Haywood
04-13-2007, 11:59 AM
[ QUOTE ]
“The play element in culture provides a prima facie justification for the psychoanalytic doctrine of sublimation, which views ‘higher’ cultural activities as substitutes for infantile pleasures.”

[/ QUOTE ]

So a cigar is never just a cigar, and play is never just play.

I think ultimately, this a definition game. How do we know that pleasure, say skydiving, or a cool breeze, are really "substitutes for infantile pleasures,"? Because it's defined that way. Pleasure is defined as the feeling an infant has when happy.

To me, Brown is presenting psychobabble. The best way to determine what play "really" is or comes from is to figure out its evolutionary role. It appears that play is the running of little subroutines for the purpose of practice and learning. A prime theme of child's play is imitating adults. Whenever children's play resembles adult activity, it touches off an "oh how fukng cute" response of the parent, whose warmth stimulates further play. The pleasure of seeing a toddler do big kid things is so intense and instantaneous, it has to be hard wired. It's so we'll smile and praise the kid, encouraging him to stay active and learning.

The play mechanism is for training the young, but once established, it is still hanging around for adults to use, hence our interest in power tools, stock car racing, Trivial Pursuit, and internet flames like this.

"Play as an end, as a goal, means that life itself has intrinsic value." Bah, that's just a philosopher fellating his ideas. Play developed as a biological mechanism to enhance learning. Those quotes do not attempt to trace play to its evolutionary roots; therefore it is poetry, not science.

Rewrite: "Play is an end, a goal, which means that it is wired to our chemical reward system."

Or: Sapiens are fulfilled only when dopamine tickles our reward receptors.

coberst
04-13-2007, 12:10 PM
Bill

Brown is not the pnly scholar to speak about the matter of play.

What I find interesting about this matter is that I have been a self-learner for 25 years and have always wondered just why I found this activity to be so satisfying. Now I know, it is play.

hmkpoker
04-14-2007, 06:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Sapiens are fulfilled only in play

[/ QUOTE ]

One of two things must be true: either this statement is incredibly false, or it is pointless. If play is to be distinguished from work or achievement, then it is clearly false because those things are clearly fulfilling to human beings. I don't even see how you can disagree with that.

Either that or "play" is herein defined as "whatever fulfills a human being," making the statement circular.

coberst
04-15-2007, 04:45 AM
Disinterested knowledge is not called disinterested because I have no interest in it.

It means that my interest in it is determined not for extrinsic reasons but for intrinsic reasons.

It is 'play interest', in that it is not directly related to my duty for today. It is of intrinsic interest just because I want to understand something that has no direct correlation with making my way in the world today.

It is the kind of interest I have when I go to the hobby shop and buy a bunch of paints and some bottles of color and go home and try to paint a picture of my dog. Or perhaps I go the store and get the equipment for setting up a dark room at home to develop pictures. Or I buy a guitar and an instruction book and start 'paying the guitar'.

Perhaps it is when I go to the library and borrow a book about psychology because I have always wondered why psychology is all about. It is a process of starting a new jigsaw puzzle.

Play is something done in freedom's embrace.

This is an idea that is new for most people. It is important that we do not reject something because it is new and thus incomprehensible in the beginning. Ducking into our shell when encountering something new works for the turtle but is not useful if one wants to explore new ideas.

ill rich
04-15-2007, 05:29 PM
i agree

playing is probably one of the best things in life

PairTheBoard
04-15-2007, 08:12 PM
I think we've seen enough naive interpretations of human behaviors according to their roles providing evolutionary advantage to be more than a bit sceptical when someone claims this or that role is the obvious one.

Pleasure in and of itself probably has evolutionary advantages. Experiencing pleasure probably strengthens our will to survive. Certainly, experiencing enough pain weakens it as is evident by those seeking Dr Kervorkian's assistance.

So it seems reasonable to think that we may have evolved ways to experience pleasure, Play evidently being one of them. Some Play designed to learn survival skills. Some Play possibly just for the sake of Pleasure in and of itself. And for possibly other reasons involving evolutionary advantage that we just haven't thought of yet.

It may be that our Love of Play developed by chance during a period when there was little work involved for survival. Hunting and Gathering was plentiful. One isolated tribe developed by chance a special Pleasure in Play that had little evolutionary advantage at the time. But lo and behold, when the environment shifted to harder times the Playful Tribe suddenly found itself with access to intellectual resources giving it the power to survive while the Dull Workaholic Tribes did not.

So the fears that if automation left us with nothing to do but play we would be adrift in pointless unfullfilling misery, may be totally off base. It just might usher in a new era of pleasurable and fullfilling play which just might prepare us for other future unforseen events.

I once read a story, or maybe it was a Twilight Zone Type show, where a guy liked to collect things. They were all worthless items when he collected them, but for some reason he treasured them. He was considered a big loser by everybody because he never made much money or acieved much success at anything. Then one day a dealer in unusual items chanced upon the collector and made him rich beyond his wildest dreams.

Personally, I like watching the Playboy Channel. I've just got a hunch there's going to be a big payday in it for me somewhere down the line.

PairTheBoard

ill rich
04-16-2007, 02:10 AM
^ nice theory but i dont think its correct

hmkpoker
04-16-2007, 06:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]

It is the kind of interest I have when I go to the hobby shop and buy a bunch of paints and some bottles of color and go home and try to paint a picture of my dog. Or perhaps I go the store and get the equipment for setting up a dark room at home to develop pictures. Or I buy a guitar and an instruction book and start 'paying the guitar'.

Perhaps it is when I go to the library and borrow a book about psychology because I have always wondered why psychology is all about. It is a process of starting a new jigsaw puzzle.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are completely different things. You've just said defined play as whatever fulfills human beings, when the thesis of your post is about what fulfills human beings; so in effect it's like saying that "human beings are satisfied by that which satisfies them."

coberst
04-16-2007, 09:13 AM
[ QUOTE ]
^ nice theory but i dont think its correct

[/ QUOTE ]

My experience leads me to conclude that this idea has validity. Based upon Carl Sagan's comment that "Understanding is a kind of ecstasy" he might very well agree if he were around to do so.

ill rich
04-16-2007, 12:55 PM
most of that theory is based around what if's and circular arguments

it sounds nice, but thats about it