Finite and infinite games
The book “Finite and Infinite Games” by James P. Carse explores how different types of games can shape our lives, society, culture, and values. He argues that playing infinite games, which have no clear end or winners, can lead to more meaningful and cooperative living than playing finite games, which are focused on winning or losing.
John P. Bean’s work, “Alternative models of professorial roles: New languages to reimagine faculty work,” advocates for redefining faculty roles in academia by moving away from traditional metrics of productivity and accountability towards embracing concepts such as play, mysticism, the soul, and community. Bean argues that current descriptions of faculty work limit creativity and do not capture the essence of academic engagement, stifling innovation and genuine scholarship. By adopting new languages and frameworks, Bean suggests that faculty roles can be reimagined to foster a more meaningful, imaginative, and intrinsically motivated academic environment. James P. Carse’s ideas on mysticism in teaching are highlighted as embodying this transformative approach, emphasizing the importance of sparking thought and nurturing wisdom over mere knowledge transfer. The document critiques the commodification of education and calls for a paradigm shift towards valuing deeper, qualitative aspects of academic life.
“Finite and Infinite Games” by James P. Carse explores two types of games: finite and infinite. Finite games are played with the goal of winning and have clear endpoints, rules, and winners. They are structured and bounded by time, space, and participants. Examples include most sports and competitive games.
In contrast, infinite games are played with the purpose of continuing the play and inviting others to play. There are no clear winners or losers, and the rules may change. The objective is not to win but to perpetuate the game. Infinite games are about growth, change, and transformation.
Carse uses these concepts to delve into human behaviour, society, culture, and values. He suggests that in life, viewing situations as infinite games can lead to a more meaningful and cooperative existence rather than focusing on winning or losing. This perspective encourages inclusivity, adaptability, and the recognition that many of life’s challenges and interactions are not zero-sum games.
John P. Bean
“Alternative models of professorial roles: New languages to reimagine faculty work,” by John P. Bean, explores the need for reimagining faculty roles in higher education. Bean argues that the current language used to describe faculty work, heavily influenced by metrics of productivity and accountability, is limiting. He suggests that to foster creativity among students and faculty alike, adopting new languages encapsulating more expansive and holistic views of academic work is crucial.
Bean advocates for a shift from a focus on efficiency, productivity, and competition towards embracing concepts like play, mysticism, the soul, archetype, mythology, passion, madness, emotions, art, and community. These concepts offer alternative frameworks for understanding and valuing faculty work beyond traditional metrics.
He posits that the existing model, which emphasizes quantifiable outputs and accountability, does not fully capture the essence of academic work nor encourages the creative and innovative thinking necessary for genuine learning and scholarship. Instead, adopting new languages that resonate with deeper, more qualitative aspects of academic life can help reimagine faculty roles in ways that are more fulfilling, imaginative, and aligned with the intrinsic values of education and knowledge creation.
The document discusses the detrimental effects of the current system, such as the push towards larger class sizes and research-driven more by funding than by genuine inquiry. It also highlights how a focus on accountability and standards can stifle creativity and reduce scholarship to its most publishable units, ignoring the richness and complexity of academic exploration.
Bean calls for reconsidering faculty work that acknowledges and incorporates the diversity of academic pursuits and the importance of intrinsic motivation, valuing students, and engaging with one’s discipline out of passion and curiosity rather than for extrinsic rewards. He suggests that by embracing these alternative models, faculty can create a more meaningful, engaging, and dynamic academic environment better suited to modern intellectual life’s complexities.
James P. Carse’s ideas are referenced to illustrate a perspective on teaching that transcends traditional metrics and methodologies. Specifically, Carse’s work is mentioned in the context of mysticism in teaching. He advocates for a teaching approach that leaves students amazed not at what the teacher knows, but at what they themselves are capable of thinking. This approach underscores the transformative power of education, where the essence of teaching is not just the transfer of knowledge but the sparking of thought and the nurturing of wisdom.
Carse’s anecdote about medical students replacing their presence with tape recorders exemplifies the disconnect between traditional teaching methods and the profound human experience education can offer. This story illustrates the dangers of a purely transactional view of education, focusing on information delivery rather than inspiring curiosity and critical thinking.
Furthermore, the document draws on Carse’s perspective to argue against the commodification of education, highlighted by the shift towards efficiency, productivity, and the procurement of resources. By invoking Carse’s work, the author stresses the need for a new language and paradigm in academia—one that values creativity, mysticism, passion, and a deeper, soulful engagement with teaching and learning. This shift aims to counteract the current trends prioritising quantifiable outcomes over the intrinsic values of education, suggesting a move towards a more meaningful and fulfilling academic experience for faculty and students.
To research further
“Alternative models of professorial roles: New languages to reimagine faculty work” references several scholars and ideas supporting its argument for reimagining faculty roles beyond traditional metrics and accountability. Among those mentioned, key figures and concepts include:
- Robert Denhardt (1989): Discussed in relation to the critique of administrative leadership and its implications for faculty autonomy, suggesting an archetype that could be seen as a master-slave relationship, which underscores the need for faculty to lead themselves and find intrinsic motivation for their work.
- Seivers (1994): Mentioned in the context of meaningful work requiring no extrinsic motivation other than time and resources, which aligns with the call for a shift towards intrinsic values in academic work.
- Edward Shils (1984): Cited regarding the conflict between materialism, status, and academic values, emphasizing the importance of intrinsic motivations over extrinsic rewards in defining faculty roles.
- Carol Gilligan (1982): Her work is referenced in discussing the preference for cooperative, relational, and participatory learning environments over competitive and hierarchical ones, suggesting a shift in how faculty roles and rewards are structured.
- Juliet Schor (1992): Her documentation of the erosion of leisure time in “The Overworked American” critiques the increasing demands on faculty time and the loss of leisure, which historically constituted one of the attractions of academic life.
- Anne Wilson Schaef and Diane Fassel (1988): Their discussion of workaholism in “The Addictive Organization” is used to argue against the pathological aspects of overwork and its normalization within academia.
- Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1975): Introduced the concept of “flow,” an effortless kind of work between boredom and anxiety, to contrast the unhealthy anxiety dominant in academic work environments.
- Raphael Sassower’s (1994) essay “On Madness in the Academy” is leveraged to advocate for embracing experimentation, mistakes, and the challenging of norms as a means to transformative academic practice, contrasting it with the conservative, incremental nature of much scholarly work.
These references collectively build a case for redefining faculty work to emphasize creativity, intrinsic motivation, community, and a broader range of human values. The document argues for adopting new languages—such as play, mysticism, the soul, archetype, mythology, passion, madness, emotions, art, and community—to envision and enact faculty roles that transcend the limitations imposed by traditional metrics of productivity and accountability.
In the document “Alternative models of Professorial Roles: New languages to reimagine faculty work,” James P. Carse is explicitly mentioned in the context of mysticism in teaching. However, other thinkers and concepts are also cited to support the broader idea of reimagining faculty roles through new languages that go beyond traditional academic metrics. These include:
- Thomas Moore (1992), in “Care of the Soul,” discusses the language of soulful caring, emphasizing attention, devotion, and the depth of human life and culture beyond empirical measurement.
- Robert Sardello (1992), in “Facing the World with Soul,” speaks to the educational role of guiding the soul into the world, critiquing materialism and advocating for psychological, spiritual, relational, and emotional integrity in education.
- Elie Humbert (1984), through his work on C.G. Jung, introduces the concept of archetypes and their role in seeing the world, which can enrich teaching by linking it to deeper, universal human experiences.
- Joseph Campbell (1988), in “The Power of Myth,” highlights the role of myth in transforming consciousness and providing a broader context for our lives, which can deepen the educational experience.
- James Hillman (1972) discusses how education and teaching are inherently linked to eros (passionate love), emphasizing that true learning and teaching are acts of love and transformation.
These thinkers and concepts contribute to the document’s argument for a more holistic, humanistic approach to faculty roles that values creativity, intrinsic motivation, and the depth of human experience. They collectively underscore the need for an educational paradigm that goes beyond efficiency and productivity to embrace the complexity and richness of teaching and learning.
In the document, mysticism in teaching emphasises the importance of wonder, surprise, and the profound effects that arise from simplicity in teaching and scholarship. This approach to education values the unnameable and the intangible aspects of knowledge and learning, suggesting that there’s more to education than can be quantified or analyzed through conventional methods. Mysticism in teaching invites instructors and students alike to confront the limitations of analytical systems and to appreciate the depth of human experience and understanding.
Mysticism in teaching involves a shift from a solely content-focused approach to one that encourages students to explore what it means to be human. This exploration goes beyond the mere accumulation of subject matter knowledge, aiming to foster a sense of awe and curiosity about the world and oneself. The narrative shared from James P. Carse’s work, “Breakfast at the Victory,” exemplifies how modern education can sometimes miss the essence of learning by reducing it to information transfer rather than a transformative experience.
Furthermore, the document discusses how embracing mysticism in teaching can lead to a deeper, more meaningful engagement with education, where the teacher’s presence and the relational dynamics in the classroom play a crucial role in the learning process. It challenges the efficacy of distance education and technology-mediated learning to replicate the humanistic and mystical aspects of teaching that foster creativity, critical thinking, and personal growth.
Overall, mysticism in teaching is presented as a language and approach that reimagines the role of faculty by emphasizing education’s soulful, transformative potential. It calls for a reevaluation of teaching practices to include more soulful, contemplative, and human-centred approaches that inspire teachers and students to think deeply, reflect, and engage with their work and studies more meaningfully.
BEAN, J.P., 1998. Alternative models of professorial roles: New languages to reimagine faculty work. The Journal of Higher Education, 69(5), pp. 496-512.