I never knew thermodynamics was being used as a source for philosophy. My initial thought is “that’s silly”. It’s like using Kepler’s laws of planetary motion for philosophy. There’s no worthwhile analogy there.
Sure there is. What goes around comes around.
While that’s a good attitude for general success, it’s objectively untrue. If two persons face off with utterly incompatible goals, one must lose, even if both hold the “always a way to win” belief.
Everybody dies. Entropy always catches up with you in the end.
We can “win” in a local sense, because the Sun (and energy in the earth’s core, and tidal energy from the Moon) give us huge energy inputs. It’s like inheriting a lot of money from Rich Uncle Moneybags. If that isn’t “winning,” what is?
Brilliant
On average half the time you win, half the time some other guy wins, so at best you break even with 50/50. But there are two other scenarios. The mythical win-win and the all too common lose-lose.
Give that the the lose-lose is certainly more common than the win-win that means that overall you lose slightly more often than you win.
Therefore you cannot even break even.
There is no game.
[quote=“msmith537, post:27, topic:633995”]
There is no game.[/QUOTE
Or in otherwords…
IZTSA TRAP!
If you can’t win, and can’t break even, and can’t quite the game, then it’s time to change the rules.
Tell me what it takes to be declared a success,and I’ll redefine the rules to be able to be a success.
Success = immortality.
Yeah I just lost the game too. Damn it! I hadn’t lost it for weeks!!!
I changed mine from “win a Nobel” to “living in a van down by the river”.
Or, if you can’t have that, redefining it as building some really frigging huge city walls.
you can’t win because there’s nothing to win. You can, however, break even, which only means that you get out of life what you put into it, and has nothing to do with winning or losing. And, of course you can quit: just choose not to play any game with your life and just live in the moment.