To evidence the complexity of play and future trading, I will evaluate them as two future-based systems composed of heterogeneous actors, their interactions, and their emergence, resulting in indeterminacy. Furthermore, I will juxtapose both systems of play and future trading, unraveling the intricacies that define their conception, operation, and influence. By delving into aspects such as the conception of space–speculative temporal space, the importance of rules and free competition, and the role of myths and rituals, I aim to expose the fundamental similarities and differences between these two complex systems and understand how these two models that engage with uncertainty have prevailed.

To evidence the complexity of play and future trading, I will evaluate them as two future-based systems composed of heterogeneous actors, their interactions, and their emergence, resulting in indeterminacy. Furthermore, I will juxtapose both systems of play and future trading, unraveling the intricacies that define their conception, operation, and influence. By delving into aspects such as the conception of space–speculative temporal space, the importance of rules and free competition, and the role of myths and rituals, I aim to expose the fundamental similarities and differences between these two complex systems and understand how these two models that engage with uncertainty have prevailed.

The presence of play in nature as a deeply rooted phenomenon has been frequently explored and highlighted. Huizinga (2014) emphasizes how play extends beyond human culture, as observed in the behaviors of diverse species. From birds’ intricate mating displays to primates’ interactions, the cooperative aspect of play underscores its evolutionary significance as a means of social bonding and communication. Through play, individuals learn to navigate complex social structures, establish hierarchies, and negotiate conflicts, an essential process of mimesis for survival and reproduction in the natural world. This shared inclination towards play underscores its complex role in shaping social dynamics and cognitive development across species.

Firstly, we need to delve into and define the term ‘play,’ an overarching term for the creation of games, to fully grasp its complex features. The etymology of the English word ‘play’ comes from the Anglo-Saxon word plega, which refers to a rapid movement, a gesture, a grasp of the hands, clapping, playing on a musical instrument, and all kinds of bodily activity (Huzinga, 2014). This brings us to our first complex feature, the body and its relationship to others: interactions. Play involves a series of interrelationships and connections, which could be explored in detail in human cognitive and neurological processes—however, I will not focus on this aspect in this paper. Instead, I will delve into the complexity of social interactions among actors who engage in play. Complex systems such as play are characterized by being composed of multiple agents and relationships. Gomes and Gubareva (2020) state that complexity emerges because of the heterogeneous nature of agents, who are not alike; they differ in their preferences, endowments, expectations, hierarchical position, degree of connectivity, and ability to engage in successful interactions, among other features. Play initiates from the idea that you need at least two people, thus the inherent social aspect, and within that condition, both actors bring unique skills and interests that affect the game’s dynamics and overall outcome.

A complementary definition for play comes from the ancient Hindu word for play, ‘Lila’: “…describing all reality as the outcome of creative play. It makes the creation, destruction, and re-creation of everything that cycles in the cosmos the play of the gods” (Pethick, 2021, pp.22-23). Besides the supernatural aspect of the gods and fate, which I will explore below in more detail, this definition suggests that within the seemingly chaotic nature of existence lies underlying features of destruction and creation, spontaneity and structure, and recreation and emergence. This relation between structure and spontaneity mirrors the fundamental tension within complex systems, where order emerges from chaos and how novel patterns arise from interactions among diverse elements. Play is emergent, demonstrating how a set of initial conditions—rules, spaces, time—can affect the execution of the game, and subsequentially, actors may then propel further changes and constantly create new possibilities. “As the interaction occurs, agents learn, adapt, and mutate, leading to a systematic and never-ending evolutionary process where the individual agents and the whole structure are subject to constant and perpetual change” (Gomes & Gubareva, 2020, p.316). Thus, among individual behaviors and interactions lie a series of complex structures and infinite possibilities that influence the heterogeneous actors and the outcome, making it completely unpredictable.

Play’s emergent properties defy reductionism, evident in its interdeteminacy and evolutionary nature. Mihai Spariosu, an expert in human development, states, “Play is one of those elusive phenomena which can never be contained within a systematic scholarly treatise; indeed, play transcends all disciplines” (Pethick, 2021, p.23). Play is a microcosm of the larger complex systems it operates, embodying adaptability that characterizes emergent phenomena across diverse domains of human culture. Play is inherently complex because it is a system whose core is its interrelationships and diverse dynamics while embracing the heterogeneous nature of its agents and emergent properties. This results in a system where uncertainty is at the forefront. By recognizing the complexity inherent in play, we gain insight into its profound significance in shaping human culture, behavior, and cognition, influencing institutions, economic models, and, subsequently, collective narratives of uncertainty, which I will denominate as social fiction.