Conversation

I'm generally a bit -1 on rigid taxonomies, but one categorisation I definitely wish books were better sorted into is "Is this book better or worse if I take it seriously while I'm reading it?"
3
41
I'm currently reading Finite and Infinite Games and I'd previously have assumed that the answer was "better" but literally everything in it is wrong and people seem to still get a lot out of it so I guess it must have been a "worse" after all.
7
38
Replying to and
I’d love to read this. It’s been a while since I read it and I can’t remember many of the specifics, but I’ve always handwavily associated the idea of getting too engrossed in a finite game with what you might call an eternalistic stance toward purpose.
2
14
It's one of the rare books I didn't finish. The dichotomies were often too squishy and levels of abstraction often didn't stack. You made my day with this. The book is adored by so many I respect that I've doubted my comprehension at times.
7
18
Replying to and
This is a bit like saying Jurassic Park gets dinosaurs wrong. I think you guys are looking for praxis in a work of poiesis. Carse cannot be dissected like philosophy. He is best experienced as ecstatic poetry and paired with analytical writers on his themes (Arendt pairs well)
Replying to and
I am not objecting to it being a source of inspiration. I am objecting because people very much do treat it as a work of philosophy: it becomes a cited premise in logical arguments. Those who actually accept it as no more than a kind of spiritual sermon: may the zen be with you
1
1