Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T19:41:21.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Grasshopper’s Error: Or, On How Life is a Game

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2015

AVERY KOLERS
AVERY KOLERS*
Affiliation:
University of Louisville
*
*<[email protected]>
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I here defend the thesis that the best life is the life that one plays as a game—specifically, a ‘Suitsian’ game that meets the definition proposed in The Grasshopper by Bernard Suits. Even more specifically, it is a nested, open, role-playing game where the life’s quality as a game partly depends on there being no more people than players. To defend this thesis I refute two powerful challenges to it, one from Thomas Hurka (2006) and another from within The Grasshopper itself. In the process, I offer a new interpretation of that enigmatic and challenging book.

La meilleure vie est celle que l’on vit comme un jeu — en particulier un jeu correspondant à la définition proposée par Bernard Suits dans The Grasshopper. Plus spécifiquement encore, il s’agit d’un jeu de rôle ouvert et imbriqué, dans lequel la qualité de la vie en tant que jeu dépend du fait qu’il n’y ait pas davantage de personnes que de joueurs. Pour défendre cette thèse, je réponds à deux critiques qui lui ont été adressées, l’une par Hurka (2006) et l’autre dans The Grasshopper lui-même, tout en proposant une nouvelle interprétation de ce livre complexe et énigmatique.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 54 , Issue 4 , December 2015 , pp. 727 - 746
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arpaly, Nomy 2010 “Comment.” In Wolf: 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austen, Ian 2014 “Second Day’s Effort Pays for a Climber from Poland.” The New York Times, 19 July. Online: http://nyti.ms/1rstFkU.Google Scholar
Bäck, Allan 2008 “The Paper World of Bernard Suits.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 35: 156–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belson, Ken 2012 “Olympic Ideal Takes Beating in Badminton.” The New York Times, 2 August. Online: http://nyti.ms/1yw5vp5.Google Scholar
Chappell, Timothy 2009 “Infinity Goes up on Trial: Must Immortality Be Meaningless?” European Journal of Philosophy 17: 30–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardwig, John 2009 “Going to Meet Death: The Art of Dying in the Early Part of the Twenty-First Century.” Hastings Center Report 39: 37–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurka, Thomas 2006 “Games and the Good: I.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supp. 80: 217–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauppinen, Antti 2012 “Meaningfulness and Time.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84: 345–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suits, Bernard 2014 The Grasshopper: Games, Life, and Utopia. Third ed. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Suits, Bernard 1967 “Is Life a Game We Are Playing?” Ethics 77: 209–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tasioulas, John 2006 “Games and the Good: II.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supp. 80: 237–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Inwagen, Peter 1990 Material Beings. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Bernard 1973 “The Makropulos Case: Reflections on the Tedium of Immortality.” In Problems of the Self: Philosophical Papers 1956-1972, 82–100. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig 1967 Philosophical Investigations. Translated by G.E.M. Anscombe. 3rd ed. Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wolf, Susan 2010 Meaning in Life and Why It Matters. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar