To Play is Human (My 100th Post!)

wpid-imag0460_1.jpgNo one likes to be pigeon-holed but it’s an undeniable fact of life. There is no escaping the differences to be found in human beings, these differences can differentiate individuals in a variety of ways relative to the culture in which they belong. If you are a different gender (including any variety covered by ‘queer studies‘) or a different race from those who hold power in your culture, this could mark you out as ‘different’ regardless of population density. You can also be marked out as ‘different’ on an individual level based on these kinds of characteristics.

buzz and jessie toys by bullyland from Fun Junction Toy Shop Crieff PerthshireSometimes we embrace these ‘differences’, especially when we find others who share this feature in common and, more importantly, share our perspective on what it means to have this feature. Often, when this happens we don’t feel so different any more. These features are what philosopher Ian Hacking calls ‘human kinds’ and according to Hacking it is by being responsive to these kinds, by rejecting some and embracing others, and by providing input into how these ‘kinds’ are defined, that we develop and augment the original cultural understanding of said ‘kind’.

The way in which a culture understands a ‘kind’, for the most part, can be changed by the actions and attitudes of those who identify (or are identified) as belonging to a kind. That said there is one human kind that seems to be recognised in almost every culture on earth. Individuals belonging to it are treated in very different ways to those who don’t belong and there is no escaping it, you have no choice about whether you belong to it and you have no choice about when society deems you unfit to be associated with that kind any longer.

That kind is ‘child’ and there is so much that we adults do and say which defines the kind (and often a little too little that we take from children themselves that contributes to it): things can be ‘childish’ or ‘infantile’, but they can also be ‘naive’ or ‘innocent’. If there is anything truly universal about human culture it might just be the belief in the existence of ‘children’. Of course there is a great variance in the way different cultures think children should be treated but there is little doubt that cultures accept that we have a very distinct sub-group of human beings living among us.

wpid-imag0003.jpgThere may even be some simple correlations in the way a ‘child’ is defined by different cultures. Primary among these will obviously be age, but another important and undeniable feature of ‘childhood’ is the way that children learn: they learn by seeing, then by replicating behaviours and actions and further to this they learn by experimenting with these behaviours and the ideas they’ve picked up. It might not be the case that every culture has a set name for this but in English-speaking cultures we call these behaviours ‘play’.

One of the trickiest things for any philosopher who looks at the nature of human existence is the difficulty of providing generalities, absolutes, and/or ‘universalisable’ ideas. In the face of sometimes overwhelming anthropological evidence it has become clear that for many ‘intuitive’ ideas about ‘human nature’ there is often a counterexample where some culture out there in the world, enjoys an existence which is contrary to what ‘common sense’ would expect. There are cultures without numbers, cultures in which criminals are ignored as if ‘dead’, and countless cultures with a far less solid marking between ‘real’ and ‘imaginary’ than we are familiar with.

Click here to see loads of animals playing football

In response to this, if there is anything that we might have a chance of seeing as universal I doubt it will be a grasp of basic numbers or even some kind of over-ruling ethical principle.Β  I would be willing to take a fairly large wager that one of the most universal traits that define human existence is the fact that we have all, at some point in our lives, played. As a species we share play (in fact some other species can also be said to play in the way we do), in my opinion play is as close to a universal human behaviour as you could get. I’d also be inclined to say that most adults still play without even noticing it.

Play and childhood are features I’d bet you can find in any human culture (and in many other animals too), is it any wonder that a philosopher with an interest in the meaning of human existence would find so much to talk about in the world of toys?


8 comments on “To Play is Human (My 100th Post!)

  1. ksbeth says:

    i completely understand this and the connection and i am the same. teaching kinders and having young grandchildren gives me even more opportunities for these experiences and i feel lucky for that )


  2. I teach young children. I cannot imagine not playing and fund it so important for their fine motor skills. Hand muscles can only be built by working/playing. The beauty of it is that playing doesn’t feel like work, but it is important work. We need that, as well. Adults can find exercise much more fun when we’re playing at the beach, getting a quick softball game going or a evening game of hide and seek. One is never too old to play.


    • John says:

      Wholeheartedly in the same boat πŸ™‚ Play (in its many forms) is a steady constant in a normal human life I can’t imagine living a life without a small amount every day πŸ™‚


      • Me either, John. However, I am a strict teacher…let’s make that clear. πŸ™‚


        • John says:

          Ha, nothing wrong with setting boundaries πŸ˜€ Suppose it all depends on how you define ‘play’, it’s not easy to get a handle on it and it can unfortunately been as something that’s ‘not serious’ or worse still a ‘waste of time’. That said I wouldn’t support endless free play in a classroom environment at all, guiding children to the things that they can learn can only be done from the outside of childhood experience (they can’t do it themselves). Otherwise kids might miss things that they never knew were important/interesting because they don’t recognise them as such


        • You are very well educated on this topic, John. I love that, you know. What I love about early childhood is everything is new, so work is play. A wonderful eye to look through life from, I’d say.


        • John says:

          The thing that gets me is the emotional strides young children make, the thing is because they might have trouble putting it into language we sometimes fail to spot these developments. Just posted about this a minute ago here’s the link πŸ™‚ :


Please feel free to comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s