I'm not saying they do or they don't, nor am I saying they're healthy or unhealthy. It's a complex issue and like any other form of communication or exposure, they can still be impactful. It's why conversations such as accuracy and balance in the news, what is and isn't included in our textbooks, and diverse and healthy representation in our media are so important. We know that what we expose ourselves and others to is influential, and that those influences have ripple effects in our lives. Sometimes the impact of media is overt and noticeable, sometimes it's subtle. Sometimes it's long lasting, sometimes it's temporary. A lot of the times, we as individuals don't even realize how and why we're being influenced and without proper introspection we don't always realize the effects those influences have on us. So it's important to try and be mindful to what we consume, how we consume it, and why we choose to consume what we do.Yet again, video games do not make you violent.
No, you're saying that nobody should draw conclusions from conclusive evidence because "media influence." You're not adding to the conversation here. I know you don't like conflict but you're arguing here that just because one study on the impact of video games was withdrawn so hard that one of the researchers lost her Ph. D, we should all stare at our navels and realize that maybe they're violent after all because feelings. "We as individuals" shouldn't disregard empirical evidence just because it doesn't sit right with our tummies. We sure as shit shouldn't argue that everyone else should, too.I'm not saying they do or they don't, nor am I saying they're healthy or unhealthy.
What I'm trying to say, in a more abstract and philosophical way, is that it's important to be mindful that what we expose ourselves to affects our psyche, from the food we eat, to the space we occupy, to the conversations we have, to the company we keep. Some things are easy to quantify and measure, like lead in our drinking water. Some things, maybe not so much, like how office plants might affect our work productivity. Studies like these are important and it's important to look at empirical evidence objectively, if we're to understand these kinds of ideas. I think these are complex issues though and we owe it to ourselves to learn and understand as much as possible. That said, just because something is hard to understand and seemingly immeasurable, doesn't mean things can't affect us. Just because Geiger counters and modern physics didn't exist in ancient China for example, doesn't mean radium would be any less dangerous to handle back then than it is now. But I do understand your point, and you're right, I don't want to argue, so let's agree to disagree. :)
Dude you're still doing the "fucking magnets how do they work" dance. This isn't an abstract problem. This isn't a philosophical problem. This is an empirical study presenting empirical evidence that was empirically discredited by empirically evaluating the evidence and exposing fraud. Your entire argument here is an appeal to the mysteries of the universe. It's whataboutism at its finest. The worst part is the only one fooled is you. "I think these are complex issues though" has become your default way of saying "you're winning this debate on its merits but I'm going to appeal to pathos." Yes. The universe is complicated. Yes. We don't know everything. But fuckin' hell man the entire point of science is to push back the fucking dark and your attitude is "no matter how bright it is there are still shadows therefore both sides are right let's stop fighting." No. I'm not going to agree to disagree because you're arguing that video games are bad because you feel like they're bad. Stop it.
I have said absolutely zero things about this study and have even gone as far to say that studies like this are important, that I support them, and why I think so. I have also made absolutely zero statements about video games as a whole or a particular genre in general as being so bad as they should not be consumed. All I did was make a statement that, in general, we should take care about what we expose ourselves to in life and that implied that we shouldn't just assume anything we consume can be labeled as innocuous. Which, in all honesty, as a whole I'd consider that a fairly non-controversial position to take. You've re framed my statement in such a way as to make it sound like I'm making an argument I never made and insinuating a motivation and line of thinking behind that argument that isn't there. Further more, you're painting me in an infantile, simplistic, and naive light and have done all of the above in a condescending matter and tone. So we're done because the "argument" that's going on is completely fabricated on your part and we're done because you're not treating being respectful. We can disagree and discuss things and still have our discussions be amicable conversations. I want amicable conversations. But right now, the discourse we're having would not be what I would call "amicable" or a "conversation." Honestly, it sucks to say that, because that means we're both losing out right now.Stop it.
i tried to count how many prevaricating sentence clauses you used in this comment chain and got bored after a while
-Socrates Jazz music was going to make women into dope smoking whores and men into rapist. Rock and Roll. I wish I could find the quote but there was a doctor, who in congressional testimony, said something along the lines that the rhythm of Paint it Black was antithetical to the beating of the human heart and should be banned from the radio lest it kill off the youth. Photography was going to easily enable the reproduction of salacious images and corrupt the masses. We could talk about banned books if ya like but if you don't get my point I'm waiting my breath. Every new form of media or artistic style seems to have it's doomsayers. Almost all modern media has had a doctor lead the charge against it on a bassis of "scientifically" quantified danger of moral decay. You should be careful of what you consume but you should also be carful to have some kind of not clickbaity foundation upon which to base your belifes if you want to ground them in reality.[Writing] will create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you give your disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be hearers of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome company, having the show of wisdom without the reality.
“I think Hitler was a beginner compared to the comic-book industry,” wrote psychiatrist Frederic Wertham in his 1954 book, “Seduction of the Innocent,” which linked comics to the rise in juvenile delinquency.
Billy Burr agreesYou should be careful of what you consume
Do you ever feel like there's shit you shouldn't watch? I look at your soul like it's pixelated, and every time you watch some shit, like, that a couple of cubes float away. And the next day, a peanut butter and jelly sandwich doesn't just taste as well? Like, there's certain shit... you gotta draw a line okay? We're all adults, I'm not saying where the line is, but you gotta know where you soul is wired. Where you just gotta be like, like, (to Rogan) you're like deep cover. You're watching some guy take a(a knife to his dick), I'm watching the Food Network.
I am aware and I agree. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I disagree with the findings of the article, nor am I advocating for censorship, nor am I making a blanket statement saying that video games as a whole or even certain types of video games are unhealthy and should not be consumed at all. All I said was, is that whatever we consume in our lives do affect us, including video games, and it's important to be mindful of that.You should be careful of what you consume but you should also be carful to have some kind of not clickbaity foundation upon which to base your belifes if you want to ground them in reality.
That's a nice sentiment I suppose. The thing is that this is about weather video games cause violent behavior and the evidence doesn't seem to show that they do that. The evidence leans toward probably not and barring more evidence it seems like keeping an open mind is somewhat foolish, not that you were debating that, you were pretty carefully saying nothing about the topic at hand, while waxing philosophical in a post about violent video games. I'm not saying that your comment was directly pointed toward suggesting that we shouldn't tend to believe that video games make people more violent but maybe you can see how others might feel that you are being disingenuous. I'm all for being mindful about what you consume. I don't watch TV because I think it's a pestilent shit hole that constantly pushes messages that make us greedy, unhappy, jealous and generally supports moral values that are either saccharinly hollow or anti-social. I think our entire society is has had it's brains twisted and our values corrupted by advertising and that we are all mostly chasing things that could would never align with our true desires if we could break the spell. It's even killing our planet. Amusing ourselves to death. I don't really think that video games are so bad. I find some gross and don't play many violent games but can't possibly imagine that an hour of video games can do as much damage as an hour of commercials. I guess we all have our little niches of fear and suspicion. I'd gladly give up gaming for the rest of my days if I could trade it for a plague that killed every last person that says they work in marketing. Dare To Dream!
Performed at a high level, like all things, marketing is an art form.I'd gladly give up gaming for the rest of my days if I could trade it for a plague that killed every last person that says they work in marketing
As spoken by someone that clearly has only ever worked with low level shitheel marketers...
An art form that makes us value things more than people. An art that thrives by making us feel like what we have is not good enough, that we are not think enough, pretty enough, smart enough, rich enough or happy enough. An art that is killing our planet, that promoted depression and manic consumption and desire. The more artful the marketer who walks away from destroying our minds the better. I think you totally misunderstand my fears.
Absolutely. Video game violence continues to be a topic of debate, for better and worse. Recent studies continue to show that it's possible that violent video games have some impact on the brain and/or body, although most recent studies also suggest that playing violent video games doesn't have much of an impact on real-world behaviour. As the article says, Bushman is still last-authoring studies about video game violence. Most of the studies with Bushman's name on them suggest links between violent video games and aggression. Quite a few have had errata published about them. That's obviously concerning, although not being a cognitive science person, I have no idea how standard (or non-standard) errata are in that field. FWIW, Bushman isn't the only one whose name comes up in studies that link violent video games to aggression. Measuring things like "aggression" will always involve some level of subjectivity. How you define "aggression" can have a significant impact on your findings. Is it increased cortisol levels? Where people aim if asked to shoot a gun with rubber bullets? What words people choose if asked to complete a story? Each of these offers an incomplete picture of aggression, at best, and pretty much any good study on this topic suggests that more work needs to be done.