I bought this and read it. I liked some parts, but some parts I felt that he pulled some things out of his ass that had no connection to what he was saying before. Of course, I expected the skepticism he brought to the table since it is pretty much a staple of the philosophy that comes out nowadays.
Quote:
|
he only really quotes them to support what he's saying, to give his work a sense of reference. he doesn't really deal with their ideas directly, so none of their woman-hating shows up. it's a very sober work, i have a hard time seeing how anyone could be offended by it. as opposed to nietzsche, who is consciously trying to offend people.
|
I think one could be offended by the fact that he is relentlessly trying to convert people to becoming infinite players. I think that viewing life as an infinite player is the best way to view it. However, it is the finite games that make up the infinite game. We all love to play finite games and play them as finite players knowing that we are actually infinite players.
I think saying selfishness is a finite player's attribute is completely wrong. The selfishness that is more driven by "I want to be better than you" would be very finite, but I don't see how "I want to be the best that I can be" is finite. If you view "the best you can be" as a horizon instead of a set goal then I would think that would be the desired characteristic of an infinite player.
Overall, the book gave me some good things to think about. I really don't think it should be "required reading."