Or, that existence in reference to time can only exist in the present, and since past time in this schema never meets the criteria of existence, nor the future, they do not exist in other then the present.
This is not merely a mind game, but a qualifier for setting the difference between time as existence, and non existence.
Non existential time becomes the mode of becoming the nothingness through which that becomes conscious of It’s self. It’s Being, or Dasein.
Let me be clearer gin.
Mind games are restricted to qualified existence present , without a necessary (logical) connection to the past, as some kind of necessity without which a present is inconceivable for all practical purposes. Game theory may have seeds of earlier archaic notions which may be traced to their sources , as most games have evolved into then higher realms of their significance.
However such re-flex (reflection) is only possible through filling in probable moves, as in chess, and connect it with such advanced games as prisoners play in confined-bounded space. (that’s why they are of in dilemma)
The Reflexivity in to the black and white moves of probable best moves are bounded as well in chess into that particular move"s possibility within the limiting context of that particular move. The movement itself changes the position of the moved piece in addition of changing the context within which the move is made.
Thinking in terms of all possible moves without considering the changing context that the movement creates, explodes the possible moves quantitavely approaching infinity as the game progresses.
The game is, to selimit that explosive quantifiable evolution into boundedness, in order, …to set up a schematized way to achieve systems which will lead toward a superior progression in the beast con front ation, (see the carefully spelled and disassociated meaning structure here)
The logic of confrontation is simplified literally as black against white, in actuality they are not negated in absolute opposition, but changing the timing isn’t He spatial arrangement which is consistent with the expected content with future contextual arrangements between pieces within their changing contextual relations.
Early on, this was not understood as exclusionary tactics ofnxhanfing boundaries, which is what future time is, but simply thought them as an exclusion of all possible moves from the right one. The right one delimited all non ideal moves as wrong.
This started the idea of terminating the past set up into then futire, eclipsing the nothingness of the idea of an existential present.
This re-flexion can be generalized as the evolving entrance into conscious manifestation of the reflective process .
The game really subsist in this very early methodology for gaining consciousness through play.
The child can be seen to play games in order. to. utilize and unknown past into a present future, by adapting established rules to the myriad possibilities that need to be schematized for further utilization.
The Mind game turns on existential requirements, that rest on what appears as the future foundation of adapting to future unknown requirements. Even the earliest games have this reflexive requirement , and the various mathematical scenarios merely substantiate the most formal elements of the game.
The theory in It’s self umderstands it not as a result of exclusion, but of co-operation through identification through correlation. There isn’t He bog difference between cooperation and an operation through its lack.
The beginning dynamics lacked the game through co operation, but saw it as an existential requirement to avoid conflict which would inhibit future possibilities.
The game become structural only to further its applicability with increasing utility which requires more and more compatibility through resembling rather then contrasting identifiable use.
The game becomes a way to become conscious through evolving connections as a non conscious effort to discover the best way to exist and survive.
Post script: that is why the fact of knowledge being based on a learning experience cannot separate what has been learned in the past from what is learned now, with an eye to the future, thereby De-differentiating the learner from the learned, especially with conjectural hypothesis tied to the earliest modes of re-flection.