The more abstract and the closer you get to like evoking without without the words, I think the more when we have to interpret it with words, then we have a lot more freedom. And if there's one thing 2001, the film doesn't have is a lot of words. There were some things that like, had I known before, could have added to my interpretation, like that were just factual. Those questions in the work, but that's just that work.
In this podcast we examine a recent argument for the view that chess is not, in fact, a game. We discuss the Grasshopper’s claim that all games must have a prelusory goal, as well as Skepticus’ objection to the giant Grasshopper concerning chess. We then turn to a broader analysis of the Suitsian account of games. Does the existence of illusory checkmates offer Grasshopper an avenue for replying to Skepticus? Should we bite the bullet and agree that chess is not a game? What is a lusory attitude? Is Tamler losing his mind? Why is David so giddy?
Plus – how should Arthur C. Clarke’s novel "2001: A Space Odyssey" affect our understanding of Kubrick’s movie? And a little more on Kanye.
Sponsored By:
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: