The Universe and Everything Therein as Compared to a Game

If I were to ask you what you live by or what you put your faith in, you would undoubtedly come up with many answers, most of them clichèish. All of the answers that you might give can be reduced to one simple concept: rules. Whether you call them rules, laws, principles, guidelines, etc, they are the same thing. Everything in the Universe (meaning 'one part' or 'everything that exists') is maintained and defined by rules. How do you know that when you throw something, it will eventually be forced to the ground by gravity? You know this because you have been taught that gravity is a law, and you have observed for yourself that in every other case, it always happens. From this supposition that things are invariably attracted to the mass of the Earth you can form other logical suppositions, such as: the greater the force which propels an object from the earth the farther away it goes, or the farther away an object is, the greater the force that builds up before it strikes the Earth, or in order to cancel a force an equal or greater opposing force is required. All of these, and many more logical conclusions, can by arrived at by knowledge of the single law of gravity. In fact, the number of accurate conclusions which can be logically deduced from a single law are nearly endless. For a practical example, I heard a joke once that strikes close to home. I won't relate the entire story, but the relevant part is, Joe the auto mechanic decided to further his education and went down to the local community college and tried to sign up for classes. The only one left open was "Deductive Reasoning." Joe asked the Dean, "Just what is this deductive reasoning stuff?" The Dean answered that an example would be easier to understand than a definition, so this is the example that he gave: He asked, "Joe, do you own a weed eater?" "Sure. I've got a nice gas-powered weed eater." "Ok Joe, since you have a weed eater, I can deduce that you have a lawn right?" "Yup." Answered Joe. "Got a nice green lawn." "Right Joe, well since you have a lawn, you must have a house then." "That's right," answered Joe, "just painted it." "Well Joe, since you have a weed eater, a lawn, and a house, I think you're probably married then." "Yessiree! Love my little lady." "Ok. Then I'd also presume that since you have a weed eater, a lawn, a house, and a wife, that you probably have kids as well." "Sure do. Got 2 wonderful boys," answered Joe mystified. "So then if you have a weed eater, a lawn, a house, a wife, and children, I can probably deduce that you are a heterosexual." "Dang straight," proclaimed Joe. "I like this deductive logic stuff. Sign me up for the class." And so the Dean did. Logical deduction will go a long way when even a single law is known.

It is also true that every thing and event in the Universe is governed or defined by laws. There is nothing that occurs by chance or (randomness). How do you know this? Logically, it follows that if anything in the Universe is caused by chance, without a completely predictable result as according to a law, then everything which is touched or effected by that event is the result of randomness. When you introduce true randomness into any element of a system, the outcome of the whole system becomes random; and randomness is the ultimate level of disorder. The results of randomness are completely unknown and unknowable, in other words, unpredictable. And since the Universe is obviously like a huge machine, with each part being interrelated and dependant upon all the others, and randomness in any part would effect the whole, anything which happens as a result of randomness is in itself random, then the whole Universe would be based on randomness. But, since there are obviously laws in the Universe then not everything is random, hence if everything is not random, it is impossible for anything to be random. Randomness is simply a term invented to cover mankind's ignorance of he laws of cause and effect in certain areas. Since this is true, it also logically follows that if randomness does not control the workings of the Universe, then the only other choice besides randomness is order. Of course what defines order? Law. Therefore, whether it is known or a mystery, there is a law which defines every part of the Universe.

Going back to the first premise, the understanding of a law gives the learner of that law the power to manipulate the elements involved within it. From the point in time that the observer recognizes a law, it is possible for an intelligent observer to make use of the law for his own benefit. An observer who is aware of, and understands the law of gravity (either implicitly or intuitively) has great advantage over an observer who does not. To provide a few examples--someone who understands gravity knows objects propelled away from the mass of earth are drawn consistently back. He can then build structures with height (understanding the need for bracing and support), construct catapults which rely both on propulsive force away from the Earth and then the force of gravity to draw the mass back to Earth. Because the force of gravity is constant, he can then define the law of arcing masses. He can use simple devices such as the inclined plane and pendulum. He understands the need for an opposing force to keep something airborne. He knows not to walk off the edge of a cliff. He understands the physics of water going downhill. He also now has a concept of weight which opens up a whole other realm of possibilities. All of these are simple examples of the advantages of an observer who is aware of one law. The law of gravity is a fairly obvious one, so nearly everyone understands the concept, if not all the implications of that concept. However, this example makes it clear how someone with an understanding of a law can manipulate its effects to serve him. All of the things that he can do because of his understanding of that law are utilizing his ability to manipulate the law's effects. And because the Universe is defined by laws, and laws by definition are consistent, every time he applies the same forces or objects, the result will be the same (unless another law interacts with the first one to change the result). Hence, if a law is known, part of the Universe can be manipulated.

Games are a micro-representation of the Universe. The laws are called rules, and there are fewer of them in a game than in the Universe (obviously!). The main significant difference between the Universe and a game is that in a game, there is a book which clearly defines all the rules and their results. On the Earth every time you drop a penny and there is no force acting to sustain it, it falls toward the earth-every time! In a game in which the rules state that a five of spades overcomes a four of spades, it happens that way every time. Thus, the only real difference between the Universe and a game, is that the laws in a game are more easily identified and defined simply because a game is vastly more simple than the Universe.

In affect though, the same principle of manipulating the Universe applies to the realm of games. If a player (the same as an observer in the Universe) knows the rules and can work out the implication of those rules, then he has a distinct advantage over the player who has not. For example, in the game of Magic. A player is playing against a black and red deck. He has the Elder Dragon Legend out (which requires a swamp, mountain, and island for upkeep) and during a future turn he plays Illusionary Terrain and turns all of his opponents swamps into forests. This effectual immobilizes half of his opponent's capacity. However, because he was not aware of all the implications of that card he has also turned his own swamps into forests which means that he can not pay the upkeep for his Elder Dragon and has to bury it. Also, because of the cumulative upkeep of Illusionary Terrain, his opponent's swamps will eventually revert when he can no longer afford the upkeep. So, what seemed an immediate major offensive card ended up hurting him more than his opponent because he was not aware of all the rules or the implications of manipulating them in that manner. As another example, in Rise and Decline of the Third Reich, most players are not aware that if Britain loses control of Gibraltar there is an immediate loss of 30 BRP, plus they can no longer move fleets or troops from the Mediterranean front to the Western front, also, they lose domination of the seas on the Western front because German and Italian fleets can move freely between the Mediterranean and Western front. Because of this lack of understanding of the rules, most people leave only token forces on the barren rock of Gibraltar. These are all examples of how being aware of the rules and their implications gives a player a major advantage in a game, just as it gives an observer an advantage in the Universe. To continue our joke illustration. Joe may not understand the full implications of the deductive logic, and therefore may go back to the Autoshop and tell Ben he signed up for a deductive logic class. Ben will ask, "What's that?" Joe might reply, "I'll show you," attempting to follow the Dean's example. "Do you have a weed eater Ben?" "Nope. Sure don't," Ben might reply. Then Joe's perception of the system that he failed to integrate might be this, "Get away from me you homosexual!" To put it in literary examples with a story there is an excellent example in Gawain and the Green Knight, . The story of Gawain and the Green Knight is based on games, which are demonstrated as a way of exercising power. The story of Gawain is a power play on the part of the characters which are superior to the common man. Gawain is humbled in the end-which is the point of the story from the very beginning. Most casual readers see Gawain as Medieval entertainment, but actually it is much deeper than that.

To understand the lessons in Gawain and the Green Knight one must first understand the nature of the politics of power. In real life, as in Gawain's case, most games are an exercise of power over the ignorant, therefore the greatest games are those with players who are ignorant of their participation. In the real world there are people who treat life as a game and people merely as players. The Gamemasters are those who are aware of the rules and aware of the fact that a game is being played. When the rules of the game are unbreakable (ie. Physical laws, Psychological laws, Mathematical laws, Social rules) then the players who are ignorant of the rules are at the mercy of those who know them. Thus Gawain was controlled by Morgan and the Green Knight. He was forced to participate in their game because they knew the rules and knew ways which would force him to react predictably. They knew the rules and their implications. The Gamemasters in the game knew that the Green Knight could not be killed. Gawain was ignorant of the fact. Gawain was also ignorant that he was immersed in a game. The fact of his ignorance is what facilitated his willingness to play. We find at the end of the story that Gawain was at the mercy of the Gamemasters for the whole contest. In Gawain's case the major sets of rules were magic and chivalry. Chivalry being the set of rules which Gawain was purported to be the master of. This brings us to the lesson of the story.

Gawain was presented as the pinnacle of the chivalric knightly ideal. He was indeed a man who followed the strict code of chivalry with almost unfailing zeal. (especially when it allowed him to smooch on maidens) Yet this was the very set of rules by which Gawain's value as a knight was tested. As long as he followed the rules of chivalry, or the game rules, his actions and reactions were easily manipulated by the Gamemasters because they knew the rules and how Gawain would have to react. The cleverness of their machinations created a paradox from which Gawain could not escape. On the one hand he was bound by courtesy to accept whatever the lord of the castle demanded for his hospitality. Yet the lord proposed a game within a game with which he knew Gawain's fate was sealed. Gawain could not refuse the lord's demand of the daily exchange of the prizes which they earned during the day, thus, ironically enough when the green mantle came into his possession he could not keep it because of his promise to the lord. Yet he could not refuse it both because the lady insisted on him taking it in payment and remembrance (chivalry), and because of the rule of the larger game of life-which is self preservation (he knew that he would die without it. So Gawain was trapped by the very rules which he held dear. If he gave up the mantle as his rules would demand he would surely die when the Green Knight got his chop at his head, and the Lord would know that Gawain was in some kind of relationship with his wife since he knew that the mantle was hers. However, Gawain was compelled to keep the mantle as the Gamemasters knew he would, (both because the lady had given it to him, and because it was his only hope of surviving) thus they defeated him mentally and psychologically by causing him to abandon the chivalric code that he held so dear, and if he did not fall and give up on his knightly virtues they would still win because he would die. Therein Gawain's only hope to survive the game was to break one of his rules. However, he did not win because the lord was the same entity as the Green knight and knew all about the mantle. So the Gamemasters won-as they must. They accomplished the didactic part of the game, which was to show Gawain, and whoever else read the story, that perhaps sometimes the very things which you hold so dearly are your worst enemy. Then perhaps more ultimately to avoid playing games in which you have no grasp of the rules because there is always someone who controls the play by knowing the rules and their implications.

Being a part and function of the Universe, people are no exception to the principle of laws. There are laws which apply to every person regarding behavior, emotions, logic, and thought. The way the laws interact within each person is different because only certain laws work within certain people, but there is only one set of finite laws that are in effect within every person. The things which determine which laws are in effect in which people are their background, their religious theology, their philosophy, their fears, their hopes, their dreams, and their level of intellect. By simple observation and listening to single statements and cross referencing them, one can determine which laws define an individual. If you know the laws to begin with, it is quite simple to define a person by the laws which define them, if you do not already know the laws and their natures, it is much more difficult, but I have found that the overall set of laws from which individuals are defined is finite and the same laws can thus be applied to many different people, thus using the same overall finite set of laws (once defined) makes it easier to define people. Once the primary laws within an individual are determined it is simply a logical procedure to arrive at a formula by which their behavior, emotions, thoughts, reactions, and actions can be predicted with great success. As with any part of the Universe (man being a part), any time the same stimuli are applied under the same set of laws, the outcome is the same. Man is not exempt from the defining logical order of preset reactions to preset stimuli. The rules of the Universe have been defined by God at the first instant of time, and they do not change. And as with a game or with Universal law, knowing the law and understanding its implications endows the observer with a certain amount of control over the subject or object. Manipulation of the laws and their results is the same with man as with any other part of the Universe. The only difference with man is that he has the ability to substitute some laws that apply within himself with other laws in the overall set. Still, his condition and behavior is limited to the finite set of predefined laws.

When dealing with humans and human systems I commonly refer to the laws as 'Rules of Existence'. Everyone has them and lives by them. It is not something you can escape. The rules of existence are the same as the Universal laws that determine consistent, unavoidable action / reaction principles. It is rather taboo to think of people and their internal systems in these terms, but it is simply the logical extension of a part of the Universe. The rules of existence are truly important when analyzing systems. Everyone has 'rules of existence'. They are the rules that govern the way they live and think. Everyone, whether they know it or not, is governed by these rules. These are the rules that make people react the way they do in any given situation. Gawain and the Green Knight was talking about the rules of existence. For instance, if you know that someone believes in chance or luck, then you know they are less likely to question things like the will of God, or things that happen to them or others around them. They feel as if no one is really in control of life or the universe and there is a helplessness in them which allows them to readily accept anything which appears stable. They usually believe that there are rules in the universe, but that they are more mysterious rules like blowing on dice, or knocking on wood. They are dreamers in a sense, with a belief in an unseen realm that interacts in some way with the physical one. Thus they are likely to be superstitious and feel as if life is ultimately out of their control, and they only do these superstitious things to 'improve' their chances in the 'crap-shoot' of life. That is a lot to extrapolate from a single comment made by someone and the rules are not always so well defined, but that is only one rule and one comment, People go through dozens of the rules in a single conversation and if you listen and are able to cross reference them, then your chances for being right are exponentially increased. People are like computer systems, all systems can be analyzed the same way. To present a physical example: It's like an opaque box with two holes in it, one an entrance, and one an exit. If you drop a marble in the entrance it will come out the exit, but inside the box there are many different pathways from the entrance to the exit. Each pathway is a rule of existence. Each pathway does a different thing to the marble that you drop in. The pathways, or rules, intersect each other in dozens of places. If I drop a clear, blank marble in the box, it follows a series of pathways (rules) through the box and out the exit hole where it is very much changed. Maybe it's a different size, shape, color, weight, maybe it's chipped or scratched, it could have any number of characteristics. I could not see what happened to it in the box, I can only examine what it is when it comes out and examine what has been done to it. Each path or rule had a different effect on the marble, and so, I can figure out what path it took through the box by examining what the effect of the rules were when it came out. Therefore, I get a clearer picture of what the rules are and how they effect a marble (thought, situation, reaction, etc) that's put in, and in the future I will know, and be able to predict what might happen to any marble that's put in. I will have a good idea of how those rules will effect it and what it will be like when it comes out the other side. By analyzing the different effects under different circumstances, it is logically possible to determine what rules or laws effect people in what ways. Thus, one can control (to an extent) the system, whether it be human, physical, or game. If I want a blue marble I know which path it has to go through. If I want a blue marble with a green stripe, I know which pathways or rules will cause the marble to be affected in that way, hence I simply invoke those rules to get those results. By putting information or situations in and seeing what they look like when they come out, or how people react to the information or situation, one can determine what path it took through the mind, how that person thinks, and determine what some of their rules of existence are by the effects the rules have on the end result. Each rule always leaves a different mark. And it is very unlikely that anyone could define the active rules by using a single marble, but by repeatedly dropping in marbles, and cross-referencing the effects on all the marbles, it is possible to logically construct a working model of someone's mind, and thought patterns. This is a rather crude way of explaining how to analyze systems, but it is an effective example of how laws define predictable results which allow understanding and manipulation of the system, which in this case is a person. To address and issue before it arises, the manipulation of people is a 'dirty concept.' This is a surface reaction out of rebellion at the thought of being controlled. Manipulation is simply the same as an influence. They are interchangeable words. Manipulation does not 'control' someone, it influences them in a chosen direction. If one thinks carefully about oneself, you'll see that manipulation is a constant part of everyone, and it's not a 'bad' thing. Every time you make a statement, it is designed to provoke a certain response in someone else, or in yourself. The purpose of a statement could be to influence someone to feel something, to understand something (change their way of thinking), to direct their thoughts, to cause them to see something from your point of view, etc. It is manipulation. Every time every one of us interacts with another human being in any way, it is to manipulate, to influence, to direct. If what you do, whether it be to speak to someone or direct some action at them, then if your statement or action has purpose, you are manipulating them, or seeking to. It is simply to 'sound' of the word 'manipulation' that we do not like. The concept itself is as germane to life, as breathing. The question is not whether you ARE manipulating someone or something, but to WHAT PURPOSE you are manipulating them or it. Just as I manipulated your thoughts by addressing this issue. My purpose was to influence your thoughts to a certain degree to understand a concept, and thereby not rebel needlessly against it. That is manipulating a system.

Of course there is a lot more involved in the analysis of human systems, such as what I call the Matrices, which is the sub-system that is the responsible for the adding of new pathways. This takes into account dead-end pathways and dysfunction which must be analyzed separately from the original system, then reapplied. The matrix is another topic so I will only briefly describe it as it relates to the determination of laws within the human system.

When a human system is introduced to a new concept, thought, experience, etc, it has to incorporate it into the existing system, hence it changes who you are without changing you. Because the human system is designed as an integrated whole, with every part being related and effecting the whole. The existing system must be willing to allow this change to the old system in subtle ways. When something is added to your life, you have to allow it to make adjustments to every part of your life. It's the whole concept of systems again. When you incorporate a new piece of hardware or software into a closed system, the whole system has to make subtle changes to re-route things through the new addition or it just becomes a broken piece of the system. It isn't incorporated. Things like that happen to people every day. They can't incorporate a new piece into their system and it causes a dysfunction of the whole system. For instance, someone who has something tragic happen and a loved one dies. If they fail to incorporate that loss and reasoning into their system then they can never deal with it. Their thought processes travel around it unaltered and that new information is a broken/non-functioning part of their system. It has not been incorporated into their reasoning and thought process, therefore they do not allow it to change the system and become integrated within the whole to allow a smooth flow. They grow bitter or afraid and as a result the whole system becomes logically unreliable. They cease to function correctly, they become withdrawn or dependant, or unable to form new relationships because they fear to lose them. They are forced to recognize a new 'rule of existence', but if they fail to incorporate it into the existing system then the result is a dead end in the box. Either the marble doesn't come out at all or something is terribly wrong with it when it does come out. It is the same thing as when a new situation effects their lives. If they can not adapt to reform the matrix around the new piece, then the whole system becomes slightly or seriously dysfunctional (depending on the significance or seriousness of the new piece). For example, if someone can not accept a new parent (in this case that would be an addition of hardware) then there will be a breakdown in the current system of their lives which will be quite serious. However, if they are in class and come to the realization that they do not understand an algebraic concept (this would be an example of an addition of software) and they never come to terms with the concept and never understand it, then they may be unable to deal with that kind of algebra from that point on. If you can not change your current system of thought to incorporate the new software/hardware and allow it to change you in subtle ways then you will never be whole. There will be dead-ends and inconsistencies in your system of thought and behavior. Which take extra patience to define for an observer who is attempting to define the laws of the system. However, it in no way changes the absolute of the system's total dependence on predefined laws or rules.

So in conclusion, it is easy to see the relative importance of rules to the observer / analyst / manipulator who searches for the rules of the game and attempts to recognize their relevance to the system he is working within, whether it is Universal, human, or game. They are all the same. They simply differ in complexity. Hence, someone who is good at games is good at life, or anything else within a Universe which relies on the gaming principles of a non-random, predefined, finite sets of rules. If one can manipulate the rules and laws of games effectively, then adapting to the greater complexity of the Universe and life in general comes more easily.