An ideal world: Who's up for a(n ontological) quest?

Not completely fizzled out I hope, but perhaps in carbon-freeze while Han Solo’s friends figure how best to take down the ugly galactic slumlord… :upside_down_face:

Sigh. Autumn, my birth season, used to be my favorite for that and many reasons. Now it just seems to remind me how steeped I am in the rapacious demands of modern, rational, matter-driven concerns.

Tired limbs continuing to tread
I must bear some blame
Excursions into deep ends
With gentler means inadequately sought
Yet I refuse to drown.

Happy New Year all!
The struggling straggler

an(other) Allan Holdsworth CD I bought arrived today and...

The liner notes contain an arresting quotation from James P. Carse (of Finite and Infinite Games fame):

The rules of the finite game may not change; the rules of an infinite game must change. Finite players play within boundaries. Infinite players play with the boundaries. The finite player aims for eternal life. The infinite player aims for eternal birth.
Infinite play is inherently paradoxical, just as finite play is inherently contradictory. Because it is the purpose of infinite players to continue the play, they do not play for themselves. The contradiction of finite play is that the players desire to bring play to an end for themselves. The paradox of infinite play is that the players desire to continue the play in others. The paradox is precisely that they play only when others go on with the game.
Infinite players play best when they become least necessary to the continuation of play. It is for this reason they play as mortals.
The joyfulness of infinite play, its laughter, lies in learning to start something we cannot finish.

6 Likes