This is an anthropology article examining the role that play has in learning among primates, puppies and humans. I am specifically interested in his comments about play as part of the life process of these animals. As I read Casanave the metaphor of games lends itself to incorporating play as a legitimate aspect of learning to write. As with video games where the consequences are non real for failure, with academic games there is a pressure to compete that does not lend itself easily to the concept of play. It would be nice to remind basic writers not to take themselves so seriously, that there seriousness and apathy will limit their successes, but how can we do so in a way that they will see themselves as explorers playing in their respective fields? Maybe the rules have become so standardized, so much part of the experience of the 'game' that the 'game' is no longer recognized as such and the possibility of play is quashed.
I think that to become a better overall writer I have to become familiar with the many fields of knowledge application and some of the rules for each. This article is categorized under the anthropological umbrella but I think it is useful for its commentary on 'rules' as well as its statement of play as a means to an end. Maybe english majors are sort of like arbiters of meaning between all of the more specific fields of knowledge to explore.
In summary, this article is worth a glance for its commentary on play as a cross species means of developing a more effective existence that is better adapted to its environment.
started by crittndn on 10 Oct 11
This is an anthropology article examining the role that play has in learning among primates, puppies and humans. I am specifically interested in his comments about play as part of the life process of these animals. As I read Casanave the metaphor of games lends itself to incorporating play as a legitimate aspect of learning to write. As with video games where the consequences are non real for failure, with academic games there is a pressure to compete that does not lend itself easily to the concept of play. It would be nice to remind basic writers not to take themselves so seriously, that there seriousness and apathy will limit their successes, but how can we do so in a way that they will see themselves as explorers playing in their respective fields? Maybe the rules have become so standardized, so much part of the experience of the 'game' that the 'game' is no longer recognized as such and the possibility of play is quashed.
I think that to become a better overall writer I have to become familiar with the many fields of knowledge application and some of the rules for each. This article is categorized under the anthropological umbrella but I think it is useful for its commentary on 'rules' as well as its statement of play as a means to an end. Maybe english majors are sort of like arbiters of meaning between all of the more specific fields of knowledge to explore.
In summary, this article is worth a glance for its commentary on play as a cross species means of developing a more effective existence that is better adapted to its environment.