Game-players and game-playing: a response to Kreider

Richard Royce

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


This article is an examination of the recent contribution in this journal by Kreider. In that publication he argued against formalist and non-formalist positions concerning our understanding of game-player and game-playing, focusing his discussion around game rules and their relationship to the two key concepts. This led him to produce alternative conceptions of game-player and game-playing, and it is these conceptions tied closely to the idea of commitment, and Kreider’s arguments surrounding them, which are the subject of my article. Following an introduction, I summarize and evaluate Kreider’s dissatisfaction with earlier accounts. Then I present and examine key aspects of his proposals for a different understanding of game-players and game-playing. While I remain uncertain about some of his claims, overall my conclusions are characterized more by disagreement with him than by a sense that he has overcome problems previously expressed theories contain.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of the Philosophy of Sport
Publication statusPublished - 28 Mar 2013


  • game-player
  • game-playing
  • commitment
  • rules
  • Suits


Dive into the research topics of 'Game-players and game-playing: a response to Kreider'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this