题名

I "Game-Playing" Therefore I am: A Critical Examination of Bäck's "Postmodern Babble"

并列篇名

我「玩」故我在:針對貝克「後現代胡言亂語」的批判性考察

DOI

10.5297/ser.202212_24(4).0001

作者

Tien-Mei Hu(胡天玫)

关键词

Bernard Suits ; utopia ; gameplay ; Bernard Suits ; 烏托邦 ; 遊戲

期刊名称

大專體育學刊

卷期/出版年月

24卷4期(2022 / 12 / 31)

页次

433 - 444

内容语文

英文;繁體中文

中文摘要

The well-known utopian claim of Bernard Suits (1925-2007), that "gameplay is the ideal of human existence," has been continuously considered and debated among scholars since the publication of The Grasshopper in 1978. The harshest opposition position was taken up by Allan Bäck in "The Paper World of Bernard Suits," in which he stated that the "utopian claim" is just postmodern babble. This study aims to examine the rationality of Bäck's views. It first examines three points of contention raised by Bäck: (1) Suits confused human play and cosmic play, (2) the deduction of activities in which members of a utopia may engage is limited to the scope of human activities, and (3) a concept of a utopia purely constructed from play is meaningless. Second, it critically considers the rationality of Bäck's three points. In conclusion, there are two pieces of evidence to reject Bäck's assertions: (1) Bäck was unable to correctly understand Suits' concept of "play" and (2) Bäck's misreading was due to erroneous theoretical reference points containing the play concept of Johann Huizinga, John Dewey, and George Santayana, and the "play without player" by Euqen Fink and Hans-Georg Gadamer.

英文摘要

Bernard Suits(1925-2007)著名的「烏托邦主張」:遊戲是人類最理想的存在方式,自1978年《蚱蜢》出版以來,引起學者不斷思考和爭論。最嚴厲的反對立場出現在Allan Bäck的〈Bernard Suits虛構世界〉論文,他認為「理想的生活在於遊戲」是一個無意義的命題,並進一步主張Suits的「烏托邦主張」只是一個後現代胡言亂語。本研究目的為檢驗Bäck論點的合理性。首先,本文整理出Bäck提出的三點爭論:一、混淆了人類遊戲和宇宙遊戲,二、對烏托邦成員可能從事活動的演繹僅限於人類活動的範圍,以及三、純粹從遊戲中構建的烏托邦概念是沒有意義的。接下來,本文批判性地檢驗Bäck三個論證的合理性。最後,本文提出兩個證據來駁斥Bäck的說法:一、Bäck誤讀Suits「玩耍」概念;二、Bäck的誤讀,是來自錯誤的理論參照點,包含Johann Huizinga、John Dewey和George Santayana的玩耍概念,以及Euqen Fink和Hans-Georg Gadamer的遊戲者缺席說。

主题分类 社會科學 > 體育學
参考文献
  1. Bäck, A.(2008).The paper world of Bernard Suits.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,35(2),156-174.
  2. Bouwsma, O. K. (1949). Descartes’ evil genius. The Philosophical Review, 58(2), 141-151. https://doi.org/10.2307/2181388
  3. Carlson, C.(2011).The “playing” field: Attitudes, activities, and the conflation of play and games.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,38(1),74-87.
  4. Gadamer, H.,Weinsheimer, J.(Trans.),Marshall, D. G.(Trans.)(1989).Truth and method.Crossroad.
  5. Huizinga, J.(1955).Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture.Beacon Press.
  6. Kretchmar, R. S.(2006).The intelligibility of Suits’s utopia: The view from anthropological philosophy.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,33(1),67-77.
  7. McLaughlin, D. W.(2008).The Pennsylvania State University.
  8. Ryall, E.(2013).Playing with words: Further comment on Suits.The philosophy of play
  9. Spariosu, M. I.(1989).Dionysus reborn: Play and the aesthetic dimension in modern philosophical and scientific discourse.Cornell University Press.
  10. Suits, B.(2005).The Grasshopper: Games, life and utopia.Broadview Press.
  11. Suits, B.(1977).Words on play.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,4(1),117-131.
  12. Suits, B.(1967).Is life a game we are playing?.Ethics,77(3),209-213.
  13. Suits, B.(1978).The Grasshopper: Games, life and utopia.University of Toronto Press.
  14. Suits, B.(2014).The Grasshopper.Broadview Press.
  15. Suits, B.(2004).Venn and the art of category maintenance.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,31(1),1-14.
  16. Suits, B.(1950).University of Chicago.
  17. Suits, B.(2014).The Grasshopper: Games, life and utopia.Broadview Press.
  18. Vossen, D. P.(2016).Utopia is intelligible and game-playing is what makes utopia intelligible.Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,43(2),251-265.