I’m not sure how seriously to take Bernard Suits’ The Grasshopper. The weird thing is that he pretty well handles Wittgenstein’s argument that there is no single possible description of a game and that all the things we call games are really grouped together by family resemblance. Suits says that a game is anything activity organized around the idea of deliberately not doing something by the most efficient means. He doesn’t use this as a way of looking at where Wittgenstein takes the notion of family resemblances, but instead jumps into this odd set of dialogues defending and clarifying his claim and his own ideas about games, which, somewhat presciently, he believes will be the main occupation of humans in the future. Or is this a way of indirectly engaging with Wittgenstein? Are games the ideal lifeworld?