Reply to comment

I've just come across an article about the philosophical work of David Foster Wallace (the author whose graduation musings first kicked off this conversation). Foster was "wary of ideas...perpetually on guard against... abstract thinking (especially thinking about your own thinking)." In his undergraduate philosophy thesis, he seems to have shown the limits of logical thinking about metaphysical conclusions (specifically, about fatalism).

Reading this account of his work, it occurred to me that logic is a rigorous attempt to "end the game," to get out of it by coming to a final "proof." How very different from Alice's description of Serendip as a "game of open-ended continuity" and of herself as a young teacher learning how to "stay in the game."

Let's.