From a psychological perspective, D.W. Winnicott believed playing serves as the basis for creativity and the discovery of the self[1]. He saw play as crucial to the development of authentic selfhood, because when people play, they feel real, spontaneous and alive, and keenly interested in what they’re doing.[2].

[1] https://onluminousgrounds.wordpress.com/2010/09/19/the-creat...

[2] https://hetleadershiplab.nl/inspiratie/donald-winnicottplay-...

I recommend looking into affective neuroscience pioneered by Jaak Panksepp.

He believes play is how we do all simulated learning and by extension is the basis (and mechanism) for all creativity.

Interesting that we dont play learn as adults? Learning to drive a car is railroaded instead of the driving instructor taking one to an empty parking lot and saying „lets go wild!“. And in School/University it is just cramming bite sized knowledge for the next exam.

I was hoping to get an insightful answer, something new but alas no.

A vague connection is made between toys, Descartes and a Pascal quote.

And no mention of toys from ancient civilizations,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Valley_Civilisation

Maybe this wasn't the goal but why a title that asks a sweeping broad question but gives a weak answer? It sort of makes this article click-baity.

Read a few articles about affective neuroscience pioneered by Jaan Panksepp.

Playing is creativity and learning. It’s how we learn new things we have not been directly exposed to.

Basically we have defined play far to narrowly and it is the basis for all learning/creativity in non-stressful situations. As opposed to learning in reaction to a situation.

modeled environmental demands.

toys, and play allow aquisition of schema repetoire to employ during a putative solution in response to enironmental challenges

This sounds like a fusion of "preparation" and "thrive", leavened with fun.