0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
It depends precisely what you understand the term "Play" means. It is often seen as some sort of opposite to purposeful work that performs a useful function in society. This is not always the case. Before I retired I was a professional scientist (I still am an active scientist but pursue freely things that interest me) I thoroughtly enjoyed my job which gave me a great deal of freedom and in many ways a lot of my work had a strong element of play in it. OK I was lucky but you can't compartmentalise things quite so simply.
coberst. What a mouthful of technical terms. I think that your definition is far too restrictive. I define play as any peasurable activity indulged for the pleasure particularly one that is not an essential part of daily life and survival.
I understand creative! but please explain to me in simple terms exactly what YOU mean by "self-actualisation". please can you also indicate what isn't self-actualisation in human behaviour. This is one of the terms in my book that sounds very erudite but means absolutely nothing.
I thought you propbably meant something like that but you have failed to answer my second and most important question, define behaviour that is not part of the process of finding out what you are and where your talents lie and developing them to the best of your ability.
I thought I had been quite clear with my question and my repetition of it. To belabour my point. It seems to me that just about ALL the activities of any person fall into the category of "being part of the process of finding out what you are and where your talents lie". So the use of the statement to limit the definition of play represents no restriction of the category and is therefore pointless. This is a common feature of that sort of garbage pseudo scientific erudite language.