Recently I’ve been having doubts about things and the usual such, common events that happen during the holidays. But it was only recently that I’ve been able to grasp how ungraspable things are.
So let’s go backward and grab a couple definitions straight out of Simon Sinek’s mouth:
-Winners and Losers
-Known and unknown players
-Goal is to extend game
-No Winners or Losers
Chess has tangible rules that do not change as you play. Chess games end once they end. And chess will have a winner and loser (usually, but let’s not get caught up in the nitty gritty).
Blogging has no tangible rules, and the ones that we do know always change. Backlink spamming used to be great for Google, but now it will only get you kicked off the face of the internet. The amount of people you compete with is humongous and impossible, and declaring yourself a ‘winner’ is stupid.
If you declare yourself to be the biggest and bestest blog, you are really just the biggest and bestest blog in the sample of blogs that you chose. Declaring yourself to be the ‘best’ at anything in an infinite game is stupid in general because there will always be ups and downs in an infinite game. You will never the best forever, either.
Infinite Games: Kaizen
Finite Games: Fucking win
Finite games fit inside infinite games, they are inevitable. 1
Winning finite games can help the infinite game. Fighting for gay rights, civil rights, etc. all help the infinite game for equality and happiness and all of the other intangible stuff we value.
Capitalism provides for a great infinite game. Businesses that are alive today will eventually go away or change or whatever, but businesses will always exist. If Google disappeared, shit would definitely go down in the beginning, but other companies would still exist. 2 Capitalism allows for many businesses to be the providers of something so that if one business drops out of the infinite game, another can provide for it.
However, Simon Sinek raised an important issue, which is when a finite player competes with an infinite one.
War in Vietnam:
-Vietnam: Fight to survive (infinite game)
-US: Fight to win (finite game)
Wars are not finite, and finite goals can have accidental infinite results. New players will emerge, and new policies will reshape and create rules.
Declaring an end to an infinite game will result in immense disconnection from the infinite game. The disconnected player will become uncertain, chaotic, and unable to decide on a goal.
When you are in an infinite contest, using your interests is a horrible plan.
When you are in an infinite contest, building for the infinite future is wonderful.
So let’s boil it down to our own private lives.
As humans, goals need to be something we can see. “Fastest growing”, “even more”, and “most respected” are not tangible, visible goals. They do not motivate us. “Excercise each morning”, “become 20 lbs lighter”, and “do my homework” are realistic goals that we can see.
The goals and actions of finite and infinite players are different, and it results in the opening of many Pandora’s boxes from other Pandora’s boxes inside and from and with other Pandora’s boxes.