A friend has explained to me the importance of play in learning. I know you can learn many things by playing, you just have to look at the documentaries of mammals. There are educational games and educational toys (including war and sexist toys, although they are often presented as wrong educational anti-games, because they educate, even in a direction that we think is very wrong). Not to mention sex toys.

I will cast doubt on the emphasis that the friend has put on explaining, as if it were everyone’s starting point and we could not all learn anything by playing. I suppose, on the contrary. Maybe a few decades ago, in the Stone Age, when education was developed rigorously, that passion for defending the importance of play was understood.

What's weird today is finding someone who says you have to do more than just play and have fun in regulated education (actually, it's hard to find someone who says that). Do I mean by that that boys and girls and teens have to go wrong in school? No, by Diosas. But the need to prevent students from going wrong does not necessarily mean that everyone has to spend their best. In schools, the question of parents is becoming more and more "Have you had a good time today, heart?" instead of: "Have you learned a lot, honey?" ". Yes, both things are possible at the same time. I am referring to the emphasis. As the philosopher and pedagogue Gregorio Luri says, he forgives, but no, school is not an amusement park. Luri is Catholic and conservative; and, although I have just mentioned the goddesses, I am an atheist and a left-wing.

Against the passion of the person, today, more than the importance of play in education, we must stress how necessary it is to get bored in life. And because we're talking about learning, we also have to learn how to get bored. We cannot constantly be in foams over water, among other things, in order to be able to value them when we are. We need input against the hypermodern commandment that says Iñigo Martínez Peña (have fun! ).

There are several internal nuances of the term game or game. For the case: Is entertainment mandatory for play? Can the math exercise be a game? Remember that if you enter "win" and "lose", without playing, you have to say that you have to play, because those two things are different for the Basque people (they mix in many languages). Following the examples of Euskaltzaindia, chess or other table games do not speak of the importance of play in education. Nor do most sports. The game is "an exercise of pleasure or rest, of fun, of fun, of play and of play or of sport in which no money is played" (the game of words is an exception? ). As Euskaltzaindia added, depending on how it is taken, the game can become a game, for example, Bertsolarism.

There are hundreds of websites that explain the benefits of introducing play and/or play into learning. It's not just having a good time, we're told, as neuroscience has shown -- this and the other. Oh, yeah! Look for what the latest research on boredom to the brain says (draw one, ha, ha). The previous invention is "edutainment," the sum of the words in English education and entertainment. It is said on a website that I would like to forget as soon as possible, with joy: "The new generations require a much easier education to help learning, and according to some authors, in these systems entertainment is a tool and education is a formal content within that ecosystem," he added. Word by word, serious. What you don't have fun is because you don't want to.