I made this game for the same reason that children mimic their parents. Its the same instinct that drives toddlers to play house, or play fight, or wrestle. It’s the same reason adults gamble and have played chess for nearly a millennium.

Our daughter playing chef at the Children’s Museum.

Humans innately seek to understand the world through games and play. Our brains are arguably wired to do so. The beautiful book Playing With Reality: How Games Have Shaped Our World by Kelly Clancy, uses an incredible breadth of research to describe games as a unique human superpower, that leverages dopamine to reward us for learning. Training through games and play is perhaps the most fundamental human experience.

Games create a safe zone, a “magic circle,” where we can test beliefs and make mistakes without real-world consequences. So, what could be more important to learn about and practice, than two of the most powerful forces in humanity? What if Faith and Politics are difficult to talk about simply because we don’t play with them enough?

The Myth of the Rational Human

Too many of us avoid these topics at the dinner table. We live in a complex world of mixed-interests, limited resources, and differing moral views. It turns out that, without practice, talking with people from different backgrounds, or making decisions about uncertain topics can be incredibly hard and taxing for the human mind. Psychologists call this 'cognitive load,' and it’s why your brain gets exhausted trying to maintain self-control and process novel information at the same time. It requires what Daniel Kahneman identified as Type 1 (gut) and Type 2 (logic) thinking in his wonderful book Thinking Fast and Slow, and we’re often unaware of when our gut calculus takes over.

Despite this well-known reality of how our minds work, our education, training and even debate models are still outdated, assuming that we are “homo-economicus,” making purely rational decisions. I’ve even heard some people, (usually men) reference themselves as “purely rational” or “computer-like” in their thinking. Then they later go and buy a debt-laden truck, oversized chair, or ridiculous vacation plan and try to claim it was a “rational” thing to do. Behavioral economics has repeatedly revealed this is simply not true, and that if anything, our logical mind often works magic to support the assumptions that our gut feeds us, instead of the other way around.

But its taking time for this deeper understanding to spread.

So what, or who, actually defines the rationality that we are all supposed to abide by? We clearly don’t all have the same values in our decision making. Yet we have many overlapping stories and shared values through a variety of social systems, which are often influenced by religion, faith, identity, philosophy, and politics.

I propose that these issues are sensitive because we don’t play with them enough. We accept that practice makes perfect when it comes to children learning, sports, entertainment, but then leap to the most deadly of scenarios to practice in games: literal war. What if people need to see that the same methodology is useful for religious and political issues too?

The Power of Historical Distance

I designed this game to start investigating 3 themes:

· How can players respond to the incentives and movements that lead to, and result from, war? (More on this in my blog here.)

· How can I use a game to help people build empathy for different identities?

· How can we better understand the nuanced human experiences in histories that are so frequently taken over by political, or religious storylines afterwards?

Religion and politics can be sensitive because of the identities people design for themselves and how that identity is attached to a religious system or a political pursuit. Both often interlink an individual’s values with the actions of other people or with the ongoing existence of physical places or objects (i.e. sacred sites, relics, or leaders). The shared experience with others can provide sentiments of belonging, purpose and self-worth.

If you haven’t read Sapiens by Yuval Harari, I recommend you do so. While it definitely has its shortcomings (missing out on a number of developments from Asia, writes off spirituality, etc.), it’s an accessible read that beautifully zooms the reader out from whichever paradigm they might be in. By focusing on common themes between global humans, it identifies a variety of “stories” that humans use to group ourselves together and organize the world around us. These stories run deep in each of us and are tied deeply with our instinctual thoughts. That leads to escalating tensions, defensiveness, and anger when the topics arise.

So, instead of talking about the relationship between faith and politics today, let’s play with those of the past. That’s not “us,” it’s an agreed upon “them!” Here lies one of the powers of history: the ability to analyze human behavior, that might seem shockingly similar to our actions today, but without the personal attachments. As one friend put it to me: “Talking about the Reconquista isn’t too soon.”

Practice Being Complex

This game offers a safe space to practice engaging with faith and politics. It forces you to make decisions—about alliances, trade, demographic differences, and tolerance, all about factual realities of a bygone era. By engaging with the politics and faiths of the past, we hope you can better navigate the sensitive conversations of the present. After all, if we can practice war and sports, shouldn't we be practicing being better humans, too?

So, let’s play with Faith & Politics in the Iberian Peninsula. I dare you. 😉

The Best Way to Discuss Faith and Politics: Playing with Others

Was this time period really “Tolerant”?