I'm still thinking about games. Alternative reality games, which are called "games" only because well-established ideologies would rather eat their own tails than let ARGs into their gang. The name, "games", makes the distinction. Venerable and "serious" mind structures regulating religious, political, economical views/opinions are, by definition, not games. They are considered "real".
Role-playing games are just things we imagine for a moment of entertainment. I am a werewolf for tonight, get my imaginary adventure, vent some steam slashing imaginary enemies and happily go to work the next day, donning the mask of an accountant, clerk, boss or servant, doesn't matter which role I was assigned to.
There is a difference of course. Emotions are real and the same in both cases, but impact on baseline reality is different - imagining slashing a vampire stays in local memory only, no impact on the world whatsoever. What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. On the other hand writing a long, dull, boring lines of number on a piece of paper can literally bring down kingdoms.
Alternative reality games are something different. Lines are blurred - there are "proper" games with some reality impact, there are very serious games with little imaginary component, but what I think about now is... not a game. By the way:
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/659792
Yeah. Now that you've finished, you can continue reading :)
Not a game. Which means zero imaginary components and full impact on reality. Like religions. Zero.. um.. wait... wrong example. Let's talk about completely imaginary-free things like economics... Imagine the invisible hand of the market... Sounds like a koan, doesn't it. See the invisible hand. Politics?
They are all reality games, though they go to great lengths to make you believe (ha) they are not.
So, for the little mind exercise, let's just say there is such a thing as baseline reality. Very material, biological, raw, tough. Maslow's pyramid, bottom layer. You can play it a bit, like who can hold breath the longest, but ultimately there isn't much fun and consequences are rather dire. You don't eat, you die. You don't drink, you die. Etc. This is where science and scientific method is supposed to live by the way - just explain facts, free from the upper layers of reality...
...which are mind constructs corresponding but not identical to baseline. What we see (baseline) we interpret, judge, make fit into what we already know, it's all a mess really. Now, I'm neither historian nor philosopher, so don't quote me, but... advances in philosophy put us slightly out of the box. Made us realise that the box exists, so we can see it from inside (hard) and outside (if we can get out of it). Some theories claim that there is nothing but the box, and there is no baseline reality, just our perception and interpretation. I disagree on principle - there is a baseline reality and it can be known, period.
However, we can choose and manipulate the upper layers. We can choose what we take in (what move to watch tonight, Rambo or Free Willy?), we can choose our religion (or not), we can see the box. I wish I could take Martin Luther to a pub, buy few beers, ask whether he saw the box itself, or was his work just repainting walls he saw as boundaries of what is real?
And once it is realized that everything above baseline reality are just games (deadly serious, sometimes, sure, but seriousness does not automatically make them not-games), one can start to wonder how to hack them. Subvert. And, ultimately, whether there is yet another, much bigger box around :)
