This is the companion discussion topic for this article.
In my view this article is intellectual posturing, and really quite pretentious.
I think this article was really interesting, and gutsy to write. As a Pokedad, I have had a hard time explaining to other parents why I feel so much enthusiasm for learning the game. And, I have to admit, I am more into Pokemon than my son, who is only 8, and his attention is distracted by twenty other things. But, I think this article does articulate something that can be applied to the game, and to life. I have had enough exposure to eastern thought over my life to fit some of what Brit writes about into the context of my own understanding. Maybe if someone has no interest or curiousity, it might seem pretentious. When I read the article, I thought it revealed some careful thinking about an area Brit has been studying deeply, and trying to apply it to another part of his life he cares about. I think this was his intent, so congrats. I read and enjoy most of the articles I read on 6p, but I didn’t see this one coming!
I didn’t find the article to be pretentious. It was engaging from a philosophical standpoint; in that regard it was a success. Clearly a lot of time went into the article and I really do appreciate it.
That being said, I believe you missed your target audience on this. I assume the majority of people with Underground subscriptions are looking for strategic insights in Underground articles. That isn’t to say there is no place for philosophy, I just wish you had tied in some of your strategic wisdom.
Perhaps pretentious was a little harsh. But, I do think it was the sort of intellectual posturing or flexing that young people do when they are still starting out in their life’s intellectual journey. Much like how many first year and second year college students turn everything into relativism or Descartes or similar things when they first find out about them. As you get older you calm down and stop trying to force various philosophical or religious frameworks into everything (or force everything into various philosophical frameworks). You can do it, but it doesn’t achieve anything. It’s just a linguistic game.
I’d also add that I prefer to get my information from specialists. If I want to read comparative religion, I will find read the source text or an academic who has devoted their life to the topic. Same goes with philosophy. I wouldn’t go and for the views of a TCG player, even if they are evidently quite intelligent ones like Brit Pybas seems to be. I go to Paul Krugman for economic commentary and Gary Neville for his views on English football. God help me if if I were to go for Gary Neville for his views on economics and Paul Krugman for his is views on football.
Well I appreciate your honesty, even though it vibes a bit harsh. I do understand where you’re coming from. Brit has made it abundantly clear that he is open to constructive criticism. So on that note, without changing the entire premise of the article, what could have been approached differently to make the article more enjoyable?
Better lay off of the reefer guy!