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