From the king of pop philosophy and renowned author of the runaway hit card game HYPERtheticals comes more wild conversation starters featuring a range of unique new prompts.
Imagine a person who is your genetic clone. They are a perfect replica of yourself but raised by different people in a different place. It has come to your attention that your clone is trying to destroy you. You have three you can go into hiding, you can meet your clone and try to use reason and diplomacy, or you can attempt to destroy your clone before it destroys you. What do you do?
Designed to stimulate dorm-room debate, barstool banter, and unconventional conversation at the dinner table, this new card deck is delivered with Klosterman's trademark wit and asks you to take a stand on matters of morality, social taboo, and personal identity in a fun and engaging way. The prompts all start with "Imagine a Person..." and range in theme, allowing you to play with co-workers, friends, and family. The cards are color-coded to differentiate between kid-friendly questions, adult-only topics, and those you might save for your closest friends, making this a truly versatile--and revealing--experience.
Charles John Klosterman is an American author and essayist whose work focuses on American popular culture. He has been a columnist for Esquire and ESPN.com and wrote "The Ethicist" column for The New York Times Magazine. Klosterman is the author of twelve books, including two novels and the essay collection Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs: A Low Culture Manifesto. He was awarded the ASCAP Deems Taylor award for music criticism in 2002.
These are a lot more work and feel a lot more personal than Chuck Klosterman's previous card set HYPERtheticals. Is it better? Well, it doesn't feel quite as magical going through these brain twisters the second time around, but the exercice alone is a fresh gust of oxygen to the brain.
These question deal a lot with an issue that it dear to my heart: perception. The way you construct reality from the information you've been given. For example, if a well-educated but not particularly intelligent stranger hates you based on data available on your life, why do you think he hates you? These are a great mean of self-exploration in an existential context: what does your existence mean in this world? You can't say: it means what I want it to mean. It's not how it works.
Your existence is based on your data input, whether you like it or not. It is the information other people have of you. Fuck, I really like this thing, didn't I?