Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6431741" data-attributes="member: 42582">But this sentence is not equivalent to a sentence like &quot;Within the solar system, there are only the forces that exist within the solar system&quot;. Because the solar system is a really existing (complex) physical entity. The forces within it - of which the sun's gravitational force is perhaps the most salient - are really existing forces.The gameworld does not exist. It is imaginary. The forces that &quot;exist&quot; within the gameworld don't really exist. They are imaginary. Hence they exercise no causal power - we only imagine that they do. Hence they cannot explain anything that actually happens. If, for instance, a participant in a game declares &quot;My PC just died&quot;, the state of the gameworld is not a cause of that declaration. Because the gameworld is not real. The explanation of the declaration will be something that happened in the real world - eg that certain dice were rolled, that the results of those rolls were tabulated and manipulated in certain ways, that the result of that manipulation entails, under some or other rule of the game, that the participants in the game are obliged to treat some or other character as dead.This isn't an abstract point, either. It tells us that, if we think it is bad for the game that, in these circumstances, a player is obliged to declare &quot;My PC just died&quot; then we can look at how to change the game's procedures to avoid that outcome resulting from them.Beliefs about the content of the gameworld are real things, but on their own they can't exercise causal power. There also need to be decisions made on the basis of them - for example, decisions to roll certain dice or manipulate certain numbers on a character sheet.Those decisions are guided by the game procedures. If we want different decisions, we can change those procedures.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 6431741, member: 42582"] But this sentence is not equivalent to a sentence like "Within the solar system, there are only the forces that exist within the solar system". Because the solar system is a really existing (complex) physical entity. The forces within it - of which the sun's gravitational force is perhaps the most salient - are really existing forces. The gameworld [I]does not exist[/I]. It is imaginary. The forces that "exist" within the gameworld [I]don't really exist[/I]. They are imaginary. Hence they exercise no causal power - we only imagine that they do. Hence [I]they cannot explain anything that actually happens[/I]. If, for instance, a participant in a game declares "My PC just died", the state of the gameworld is not a cause of that declaration. Because the gameworld is not real. The explanation of the declaration will be something that happened in the real world - eg that certain dice were rolled, that the results of those rolls were tabulated and manipulated in certain ways, that the result of that manipulation entails, under some or other rule of the game, that the participants in the game are obliged to treat some or other character as dead. This isn't an abstract point, either. It tells us that, if we think it is bad for the game that, in these circumstances, a player is obliged to declare "My PC just died" then we can look at how to change the game's procedures to avoid that outcome resulting from them. Beliefs about the content of the gameworld are real things, but on their own they can't exercise causal power. There also need to be decisions made on the basis of them - for example, decisions to roll certain dice or manipulate certain numbers on a character sheet. Those decisions are guided by the game procedures. If we want different decisions, we can change those procedures. [/QUOTE]

Verification