Thinking like a game,it does not begin unless there is an opposite team

 

Fundamentally, thinking may appear to be a lonely endeavor. We go inside our heads, debating concepts and coming to conclusions. But a deeper examination uncovers an unexpected fact: thinking is a lot like playing a game, and it needs a "opposing team" to survive.

Thinking like a game

• The game of thinking involves a continual interaction of ideas and views, just as a game requires participants and competition. These opposing teams might be anything from logical arguments put out against our presumptions to conflicting perspectives on current affairs. 
• This dynamic process is essential for encouraging creativity and critical thinking, which in turn leads to better informed decisions.
• In the game of thinking, a problem or question frequently represents the initial move. This establishes the scene and the objective we have in mind. Next, we start to develop our first "play"—a concept, a fix, or a theory. But it's not really the start of the game until the other team shows up.

•  he most lucrative opponents could be from outside sources. We are forced to examine our own ideas when we interact with different points of view, whether it be through debates, open conversations, or even just reading opposing views. Similar to how a chess player predicts the movements of their opponent, we too need to think about how opposing arguments could refute our starting point. This procedure exposes any weaknesses or blind spots in our own reasoning, strengthening it.

Role of opposite Team

• Not only does the "opposing team" test us, but it also stimulates our imagination. We have to change and hone our arguments when we encounter a counterargument. This has the potential to generate completely original ideas or viewpoints that would not have surfaced in an echo chamber of similar thoughts. 
•  If both players in a chess match only make predictable moves, the game would become predictable and stagnant. Analogously, thinking in the absence of conflicting influences can result in intellectual stagnation and a lack of creativity.

• Naturally, not every rival team is made equal. Misinformation or unjustified prejudices can be harmful diversionaries. Finding well-thought-out arguments and a range of viewpoints that challenge our preconceived notions rather than just restating them is crucial.

To sum up, thinking is a dynamic game in which the "opposing team" is an essential component. It is not a passive endeavor. By accepting these challenges, we improve our own thinking and logic while also opening up new creative outlets and enabling us to make more informed decisions. The next time you find yourself thinking about an issue, keep in mind that the best ideas come from rival teams who strategically raise the stakes of the game on the field.