While flawed this is a first step to bridge D&D and philosophy!

[gnomish dwelf]

https://bigthink.com/thinking/dungeo...xS1C5E1I_JfUhg

[Millstone85]

"As you look at yourself in the mirror, you decide you want to be lawful evil today."
"You are mean, cruel and spiteful. But you never do anything truly bad."

Yeah, no.

[Rynjin]

I got about a couple of paragraphs in and...nah, this ain't it, chief.

If you wake up some days and choose to be a petty *******: you're a petty *******. That ain't a "sometimes" thing, you're just better at hiding your true, disgusting nature some days than others.

[gnomish dwelf]

I admit it is flawed, but they are trying. I give a B on effort.

[Palanan]

There are a few good thoughts here and there, but when trying to link them to D&D, it definitely misses every boat in the harbor.

This thread might be better off in the general roleplaying subforum, since this article isn't really the sort of fiction content usually discussed here in the Media section.

[gnomish dwelf]

There are a few good thoughts here and there, but when trying to link them to D&D, it definitely misses every boat in the harbor.

This thread might be better off in the general roleplaying subforum, since this article isn't really the sort of fiction content usually discussed here in the Media section.

oh sorry, as a newbie (still at pixie level) I wasnt aware of that

[Palanan]

Not to worry. There's a little grey triangle with an ! in the lower left of your post, below your name and location. Just click on that, and type a brief message asking the moderators to move the thread to the roleplaying subforum.

You've certainly done nothing wrong, but I think you might get more discussion in that section.

[gnomish dwelf]

thanks, will try that.

[Composer99]

If you're looking for philosophy and D&D, it appears there are not one, but two books on the topic for popular audiences, never mind what, if anything, philosophers have written on the topic in journals.

I wouldn't expect the books to be deep dives into philosophy or anything. (At least one of them, it appears, is part of a series of books that links topics in philosophy to various nerdy franchises - Doctor Who, Star Trek, Final Fantasy, Warcraft, and so on.)

[Willie the Duck]

Definitely a meter wide and an cm deep, but inoffensive. Mostly I think someone had a conclusion in hand and worked backwards from there, trying to force D&D to fit the argument. Eleven paragraphs is not a great vehicle for a weighty philosophical discussion, so I lay part of the blame on the medium in question. Looking at some other articles on the site, it's clearly aimed at info-tainment more than anything else.

[dafrca]

Looking at some other articles on the site, it's clearly aimed at info-tainment more than anything else.

That and ad clicks. LOL

[gnomish dwelf]

Ouch, you are so right but when one studied philosophy and never graduated, it easy to get enamoured of anything that mixes, at least in name, philosophy and one's interests... specially since modern day philosophy is in the grup of charlatans like Zizek.

[OldTrees1]

Ouch, you are so right but when one studied philosophy and never graduated, it easy to get enamoured of anything that mixes, at least in name, philosophy and one's interests... specially since modern day philosophy is in the grup of charlatans like Zizek.

Then let me make it up to you. This article was like sawdust but there are philosophers that play D&D and you can have your meal.


One of the magical things about D&D is the other. As a fantasy game it can include beings that are very different from you. It can allow you to safely (mostly) meet your imagination of the other and let you safely (mostly) practice the interaction by having a character make first contact instead of yourself.

Was this the intent? No, D&D is just a "what if" or "make believe" game. However it has the potential none the less. Can you imagine an other so alien that you can't understand them? I doubt it, but it is interesting to try.

If we look at the text, rather than authorial intent, we will see that D&D has a surprisingly non human-centric view of personhood and backs it up with a rather strong argument.

[gnomish dwelf]

Then let me make it up to you. This article was like sawdust but there are philosophers that play D&D and you can have your meal.


One of the magical things about D&D is the other. As a fantasy game it can include beings that are very different from you. It can allow you to safely (mostly) meet your imagination of the other and let you safely (mostly) practice the interaction by having a character make first contact instead of yourself.

Was this the intent? No, D&D is just a "what if" or "make believe" game. However it has the potential none the less. Can you imagine an other so alien that you can't understand them? I doubt it, but it is interesting to try.

If we look at the text, rather than authorial intent, we will see that D&D has a surprisingly non human-centric view of personhood and backs it up with a rather strong argument.

you made it up to me by choosing the same avatar as me, now your statement "there are philosophers that play D&D" seems to imply that anyone who studied philosophy is a philosopher, but I would say studying philosophy is necessary but not sufficient to be a philosopher, on the other hand your idea may be that what is necessary and sufficient to be a philosopher is to study philosophy, graduate, and get a job involving thinking and communicating about philosophy, but for me that is merely necessary to be a philosopher but not sufficient (there are other requirements for ancient philosophers and protophilosophers)...

Then your short lecture that follows seems to imply that my unfinished philosophical studies means that I am lost when it comes to philosophy, but that aint the case, my point was this is the closest I have seen to an attempt at philosophical communication, which is informing, educating, raising awareness of philosophy-related topics, and increasing the sense of wonder about philosophical arguments and debates and schools

[OldTrees1]

you made it up to me by choosing the same avatar as me, now your statement "there are philosophers that play D&D" seems to imply that anyone who studied philosophy is a philosopher, but I would say studying philosophy is necessary but not sufficient to be a philosopher, on the other hand your idea may be that what is necessary and sufficient to be a philosopher is to study philosophy, graduate, and get a job involving thinking and communicating about philosophy, but for me that is merely necessary to be a philosopher but not sufficient (there are other requirements for ancient philosophers and protophilosophers)...

Then your short lecture that follows seems to imply that my unfinished philosophical studies means that I am lost when it comes to philosophy, but that aint the case, my point was this is the closest I have seen to an attempt at philosophical communication, which is informing, educating, raising awareness of philosophy-related topics, and increasing the sense of wonder about philosophical arguments and debates and schools

I would say a philosopher is one that loves and seeks wisdom. Someone that takes time to actively ponder these questions. I agree that once upon a time doing some study of philosophy is a necessary rather than sufficient condition (although even that could be self started). I would add a degree is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition and likewise a salary is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition. I consider philosopher to be a lifestyle rather than an occupation.

I do not consider you lost. I think you and I both hoped the article was more than it was. So as consolation I left a question (What is a person?) that I found worthy of pursuit and showed how it related to D&D. I consider you a peer and a fellow traveler.

[gnomish dwelf]

I would say a philosopher is one that loves and seeks wisdom. Someone that takes time to actively ponder these questions. I agree that once upon a time doing some study of philosophy is a necessary rather than sufficient condition. I would add a degree is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition and likewise a salary is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition. I consider philosopher to be a lifestyle rather than an occupation. It does sound like our views differ slightly on this.

I do not consider you lost. I think you and I both hoped the article was more than it was. So as consolation I left a question (What is a person?) that I found worthy of pursuit and showed how it related to D&D. I consider you a peer.

oh great, i thought it was gray elf level of condescending... but I see I was wrong, i consider the conditions to be a philosopher in contemporary times are to 1.have studied philosophy as a career in university and graduated from it. 2.dedicate one's life to philosophical communication and debate 3.having a following of people that look up to one's work and which are they themselves examples of point 1 and 2. I think this because philosophy isn't just a hunt for wisdom , it's a self-reflective wise hunt for wisdom, its belonging to a history of examining issues with logic and doing a logical historiography of said tradition. That's why I hold that until the age of empires philosophy only existed in Europe, but with colonization it was extended to lands were only protophilosophical and peseudophilosophical thiguht existed.

[KorvinStarmast]

https://bigthink.com/thinking/dungeo...xS1C5E1I_JfUhg

Budket full of nope.

If we look at the text, rather than authorial intent, we will see that D&D has a surprisingly non human-centric view of personhood and backs it up with a rather strong argument.

Which is an oxymoron.

Spoiler: The game doesn't get beyond this

Show

Humans with hats are still humans with hats

I would say a philosopher is one that loves and seeks wisdom. Someone that takes time to actively ponder these questions. I agree that once upon a time doing some study of philosophy is a necessary rather than sufficient condition (although even that could be self started). I would add a degree is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition and likewise a salary is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition. I consider philosopher to be a lifestyle rather than an occupation.

Bingo. Though formal education and training in how to frame a concept, how to present an argument, and how to examine a problem are very helpful in that pursuit.

Getting a degree does not a philosopher make. Same with getting a degree does not an engineer make.

[OldTrees1]

Which is an oxymoron.

Spoiler: The game doesn't get beyond this

Show

Humans with hats are still humans with hats

Oh, indeed, it has a human-centric population. Aboleths for example could be seen as humans in a non-human hat. However it seems to systematically refute many human-centric claims about personhood.

[Vahnavoi]

Philosophy and D&D? I have a bridge... sorry, a comic to sell to you.

It's actually part of a series, there's at least five more

It's hardly a stretch, 1st edition AD&D outright paraphrases real philosophies when describing alignment. "Greatest good for the greatest number" and all that.

The reason why D&D has been bad at dealing with real philosophy for a while, despite obvious philosophical underpinnings, is the same why it's been bad at dealing with real mythology, despite obvious mythological underpinnings. For petty corporate reasons, decisions have been made to avoid anything too real to keep the game marketable.