Also, going by a "formal" approach: "Agora" dies each time the gamestate
takes a path that I disagree with. : D
jk, I believe that Agora is just a social activity and that we're dishonest
with ourselves and others often enough. along having enough disagreements
by having different point of views on the same thing that even if there was
a true common platonic state, we'd never play according to it for any good
amount of time because we're either not competent enough to achieve it at
times or prefer to not to (even if we could at a certain moment) for
self-profit at times.
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2017, Aris Merchant wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Owen Jacobson <o...@grimoire.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sep 13, 2017, at 2:19 AM, Aris Merchant <thoughtsoflifeandlight17@
> gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Agora would stop existing. It would therfore have no state. Arguably
> > >> though, if we made a meta-descision to recreate it, it would start
> > >> existing again. The Paradox of Self-Amendment has some stuff on this.
> > >
> > > Would it, though? The presence of rules may not be the defining
> feature of Agora’s existence. The rules tell us how to play, but - I would
> argue, not what Agora _is_. That definition is not formalizable without
> resorting to a higher meta-level than the rules, I suspect.
> > >
> > > That said, I have absolutely no intention of running any experiments
> on this, and in fact will object as strenuously as is possible to anything
> that would have the effect of removing all rules from Agora.
> >
> > Agora is a game. What is a game if the board is removed? Is it
> > nothing? Or is the players? I would look at the players. If they are
> > playing, the game still exists. If they aren't, and there isn't a
> > board, I would say that the game is gone.
>
> Well there's instances of a game (the players, state of play, results) and
> the game itself (a box on a shelf).
>
> Is the concept of Agora along with the result ("it used to have rules, but
> they're gone now") enough to define it as an existing instance? Are the
> initial rules a box on a shelf? Have you ever really looked at your hands?
>
>
>
