It isn't a defeat if it isn't actually a debate. The only reason they invite "gaming representatives" to these things is to tell them that they are "wrong". If they didn't get a warm body or a floating head, they would use a literal straw-man.AntiAntagonist said:Pro-Game:I bet you are pro-puppy killing. You seem to love crushing other peoples' past-times and social ties arbitrarily. I bet you laughed at the end of Old Yeller.Nuke_em_05 said:Snip
Generally I take heed to the old joke- 'Don't argue with idiots, they'll just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.' However these defeats show a general problem with intellectuals needing to learn how to defeat strawmen and emotional arguments quickly.
If the odds are stacked against the topic those debates need to be learned from and avoid being dismissed only for their defeat.
My point isn't 'We're gonna win this here debate even though they have us dead to rights', my point is that we, as gamers, are not faring well in nationally, and internationally televised debates (even in more evenly matched settings). We have to understand every tool the curmudgeons are using and expose their school-yard rantings as a horse with not just blinders, but a full blindfold.Nuke_em_05 said:It isn't a defeat if it isn't actually a debate. The only reason they invite "gaming representatives" to these things is to tell them that they are "wrong". If they didn't get a warm body or a floating head, they would use a literal straw-man.
If there was an actual unbiased venue for this sort of debate; yes, you are correct. These are not debates; these people have already made up their mind and just want to bash it into the "pro-gamers". You can't go in front of a firing squad and convince them not to shoot; in their eyes, you've already been judged and they are just there to pull the trigger. As soon as someone believes you are crazy, you can't rationally convince them you aren't; because to them, you're crazy.
I know. Plus, news outlets have been saying stuff like this for 20+ years, yet some of us are still surprised?HG131 said:I stopped caring after the 5th thread. This is the, what, tenth?
You cannot define color to a blind man. As hypocritical as this statement is; referencing my previous example of how they won't listen to the reason of someone who they have determined is crazy; you can't convince an actual crazy person that they are crazy, nor will an idiot ever understand that they are an idiot.AntiAntagonist said:My point isn't 'We're gonna win this here debate even though they have us dead to rights', my point is that we, as gamers, are not faring well in nationally, and internationally televised debates (even in more evenly matched settings). We have to understand every tool the curmudgeons are using and expose their school-yard rantings as a horse with not just blinders, but a full blindfold.Nuke_em_05 said:It isn't a defeat if it isn't actually a debate. The only reason they invite "gaming representatives" to these things is to tell them that they are "wrong". If they didn't get a warm body or a floating head, they would use a literal straw-man.
If there was an actual unbiased venue for this sort of debate; yes, you are correct. These are not debates; these people have already made up their mind and just want to bash it into the "pro-gamers". You can't go in front of a firing squad and convince them not to shoot; in their eyes, you've already been judged and they are just there to pull the trigger. As soon as someone believes you are crazy, you can't rationally convince them you aren't; because to them, you're crazy.
Sorry to edit while you were posting a reply; I wanted to be fully cogent and hit a few more points.
*edited to add last sentence*
Pretty much can't get any more conservative than Faux News.Plurralbles said:You know what else promotes hate, violence, and sexism?
FOX NEWS.
Again, I'm not looking for an absolute victory. However I do want to avoid something like what happened with the comic book industry after WWII. The only way to do that and to shorten the time till gaming is taken seriously is to take ground whenever possible and not avoid a battle because the overall verdict is defeat. If we convince one idiot that the paint by numbers belief isn't entirely filled in that is a victory, however minor.Nuke_em_05 said:You cannot define color to a blind man. As hypocritical as this statement is; referencing my previous example of how they won't listen to the reason of someone who they have determined is crazy; you can't convince an actual crazy person that they are crazy, nor will an idiot ever understand that they are an idiot.
This "debate", as with any other "debate" over emergent media; cannot be "won", cannot be "reasoned", cannot be concluded rationally. Both sides believe unwaveringly that they are absolutely "right" and the other is absolutely idiotic. As with any other "debate" on emergent media, it must simply die of old age and lost interest. We keep it alive longer by trying to participate in events such as these.
You do make a very good point here. Video games are very violent, almost excessively so at times. Scratch that; they ARE excessively violent (and morally corrupt) at times. But then so are many movies, books, songs, and works of art. I mean look at how well the Saw series is doing. I don't care if it contains some philosophy on the worth of life in it, people mainly watch it for the torture scenes. And yes I do catch the irony of me bashing a violent movie on a forum bashing people who bash violent video games. In the end it all comes down to our current culture. We need to make some serious changes to our moral values or humanity as a whole will descend into the dark pit of immorality.Good morning blues said:I dunno, guys. Clearly there's a lot of bullshit in here, but is it really inaccurate to say that Modern Warfare 2 promotes violence by naturalizing war and making it exciting? Is it really inaccurate to say that a game like Dead or Alive promotes sexism?
If the video game community were really mature at all, they would respond to these accusations by looking to see what could cause them, not saying that we should either kill or wait for the death of people that make them.