tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34342178.post3988035548777776742..comments2023-09-26T04:18:45.895-05:00Comments on Arrival : The Parousian Weblog: Education and Play - Seeking the Proper Order (Part I)Philip de Mahyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04836433393701957200noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34342178.post-48873651572985580892008-03-06T12:13:00.000-06:002008-03-06T12:13:00.000-06:00Yeah...what Ryan said.Yeah...what Ryan said.Joseph Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10553198853868798730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34342178.post-3767227115981103292008-03-03T19:58:00.000-06:002008-03-03T19:58:00.000-06:00"Animals don't play?"Interesting question so I tho..."Animals don't play?"<BR/><BR/>Interesting question so I thought i would comment. I believe animals do play, but not in the same creative and intellectual manner as humans. Of course, not all forms of human play are equally creative and intellectual. In my mind, things such as physical art (paintings, sculpture, etc), dancing, poetry, literature, music, highly organized sports, board games, etc. are examples of types of art and play that exceed that capacities of animals. Nevertheless, animals do play, and I don’t think this should be surprising. God has brought order to chaos and this might be seen even in the playfulness of animals. Often the playfulness of animals has the quality of educating that animal in survival (Cats learn to playfully pounce as cubs but later this will be their dinner ticket). Most animal play may be purely instinctual. Furthermore, there is pleasure in play that both humans and animals are capable of pursuing as an end. Yet as the quality of the animal and human soul is very different so is the quality of play. Since humans are higher in the chain of being, it is possible that humans may have all the same reasons as animals for playing (pleasure and instinct) whereas animals may not have all the same reasons as humans for playing (creativity, exercise of free will, as an end, to create something beautiful, etc). Following this implication it would seem to me that humans who image God in a way not found among the rest of creation are capable of a certain creative, reasonable, and willful play completely different than the play of the animals. These are just some passing thoughts and it has been a while since I have studied the philosophical differences between man and animal. Yet my mind comes to the question of Mortimer Adler as to whether animals are different from man in degree or kind. If man is different in kind and not just degree, I would find it natural to conclude that man’s playfulness is different in kind as well.Ryan Hallfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06252722993351860885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-34342178.post-71226009923697391342008-03-03T18:18:00.000-06:002008-03-03T18:18:00.000-06:00Animals don't play?Animals don't play?Civishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17949434514799433103noreply@blogger.com