Wittgenstein has drawn the attention of philosophers to the illuminating power of games. Comparing complex human actions to simple games may show us important things about how we think, about our language, about the intricacies of common sense. But that point is preliminary to something more fundamental: that ordinary life is learned and understood in a process of dialogue between simplified activities -- games, dances, competitions -- and life in its full, messy complexity. This passage, from W.B. Gallie's memoir An English School, makes this point with respect to the games tradition of English public school:
"Anyone who has reflected carefully on his own character is aware of certain basic or structural faults in it -- faults that show themselves again and again under outwardly varied forms and in the most diverse circumstances: for instance, the general fault of over-estimating one’s own capacities – shown in excessive confidence in one’s own judgment or the accuracy of one’s memory, or in dislike of criticisms or suggestions from others (however helpful or kindly meant), or in the inability to hold back one’s own best talents (or tricks) when these are not really needed. Now one of the great educative merits of games is that in them such faults are visibly expressed and their consequences are there for all to see, comment on, and, likely as not, curse one for. In a game, agent and act and consequence are visibly co-present; and what gives point and value to any action or move in a game is always one of those background considerations – as to how the game is going, what are the other side’s obvious weaknesses, etc. -- which are in the minds of all worthwhile players on the field. For this reason, a team-game not only displays one’s own and other people’s faults of character, it encourages the liveliest observation and criticism of these faults. A boy’s ‘games personality’ is thoroughly known, be it good or ill, by those he habitually plays with. " (page 38)
Posted by shea0017 at July 31, 2004 10:18 AM