Scalino Corleone di Napoli

Software Developer,


This conversation is closed.

The Creative Play Paradigm (or where an adjective could make all the difference, and yet...)

Play has been largely debated in these recent years, as bearing a tremendous potential for learning, socializing and all kinds of groovy stuff.

Today, the "game theory" is not only taught to computer programmers but also to executives in a broad range of management's domains, who are eager to implement it right away into new business plans that might deserve some of our attention span, because if creative play has undeniable benefits compared to casual apathy, we ought to stay awake and aware of not only who we are playing with, but above all from now on, who we are "playing" for...

As one example of this, I would mention a new social network, based on computer programming, which encourages programmers to sign up, and enter the "game" which consists in exercices, challenges, even tournaments, with the whole pack of badges and rewards, with the common basic objective of producing real programs' code, for fun, for free.

I won't cite their name because I have so many unanswered questions about this, and I don't want to give them any credits just in case they would happen to be on the "wrong side" of the chessboard...

As a neurohacker myself, I'm deeply aware of the benefits of creative play. The creative aspect of it could be a first benchmark maybe, as I'd tend to say that as long as there is actual creation (whether it's published or not) while being in the state of play, the agent is gaining power as ability. Now, is this sufficient to legitimate using this as a "free work force"? Are we to implement every aspect of game theory in our companies' management policies?

Well, I'm really not sure dudes... I would love to be willing to believe, but I have a doubt.... :)

What about you?


PS: I have set an expiration date in one month, with the idea that we could do that every year and have a yearly record of this issue status, maintaining some kind of watch...

  • Mar 29 2011: Integrating this at every level is certainly important, but not at the expense of it´s opposite. I think of it as yin and yang, yang being the play style of learning, the active style that has been largely absent inside the schools for so long, the thing is that that you just have to look outside the building to see it. It´s on the football field, at recess and sometimes in the music department. the yin style of learning (lecture style), or passive audience, has it´s benefit though. Take TED, for example. It´s an entirely passive based structure with room for the active, empowering the active by giving it it´s voice. Another example is Salman Khan´s work which interestingly, is leading to the same conclusion. So the trick I think is in the mariage of the two, and I reckon this is always the case. In any situation at any level, a mindful and organic use of both the active and the passive styles of education is inherently mandatory and can be modified based on the needs scene. In a classroom where the boys are going crazy and being medicated for it, add yang and open the window. In the endless rural ghetto below the poverty line where they have nothing but the futbol, add Ted and Salman Khan.