EN | NL | FR
Current Wings Quest 131
The Spirit of Giving XIV

Violence in LDs?

Post new topic Reply to topic

Author  Message 
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Mon 17 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

AgentO wrote:
Unfortunately to the human race, it is not, so atrocities occur on a daily basis.
In fact, many atrocities are caused by individuals thinking that their approach is the only one and non other exists/should exist and thus either

1. trying to interpret acts as if they themselves would've performed them, making the wrong conclusions and acting upon them

2. Try and force the rest of the world to fit to their ideal, which would obviously create a conflict.


I understand you find my stance distasteful, but I'm not sure I see my approach as the only one. I also fail totally to see how my stance could be responsible for 'atrocities' this just seems a bit hyperbolic to me and not really constructive to our discussion, it is still just a discussion of ideas right?

Quote:
As for "already unstable" theory, imagine this scenario:
Someone with a yet undeveloped psyche is exposed to said content, either by mistake or intentionally due to curiosity. Let's even say it was a kid.

What would have been a normative kid growing into a model citizen, will now potentially become, under the influence of these new thrills or whatever, an entirely different person, possibly violent, or perverting.


This is where I would firstly say that the parent or guardian has failed them by letting them be exposed to such content without appropriate support and guidance. I'd pretty much also deny the idea that they would suddenly find deep thrills in violent media. Ever seen how kids automatically react to things like kissing? I'd say your fears were unfounded. The kind of person who might view such media and be allured by it enough to pursue it further, is already damaged, most likely through real life experiences or mental issues. There is plenty of common-knowledge examples about this, those who bully other kids are usually bullied themselves just as one.

Quote:
This has been discussed on many forums before.


And will be in many more, it's a topic many people feel passionately about, you and I included it seems. wink5

Quote:
So ask yourself this question: Mental instability - is it a genetic attribute? or acquired behaviour? Maybe a little of both? maybe in some cases just one or the other?


Nature vs Nurture stuff yeah. My view is, it could be both or a mix of the two. Some are genetically predisposed towards aggression and dominant behaviour. I don't accept that, that predisposition however is caused by simply watching something violent. Fired up by it, yes, caused by it, no. I'd also argue that in those predisposed to aggressive and violent behaviour, need to learn at some point in their lives to understand and control that part of themselves. It's better for that sort of behaviour to be noticed by their acts in fantasy than in reality, so a responsible parent/guardian can react accordingly.

For those who are older and engaging in violent media, I'd much sooner suggest they think about violence and what sort of person they want to be, and be around, than encourage them not to engage violent media. That seems endlessly more productive to me. For somebody who recognises the violence is fantasy and constrains that violence there; they are completely healthy and can live a deeply satisfying and pleasurable life. Even if there is a large portion of people who condemn them as sick psychos without understanding them.

EllyEve wrote:
Going on a lucid dream adventure with some violence might have some dreamers wake up more courageous-- What fragile sort of mind comes back from that as a killer? I think, only someone in a difficult waking life situation, or whose psyche has been shaped by negative waking life.


I completely agree.



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Rhewin
Who is The Doctor?
Local Moderator
Rhewin has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
30
Chat Mods
Scribes
Posts: 2990
Joined: 23 Dec 2009
Last Visit: 04 Dec 2019
LD count: 360
Location: In the not too distant future... somewhere in time and space
 
PostPosted: Thu 20 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

I want to weigh in just really quick on something that is being taken for granted in this topic by the side opposing violence in LD's. There is still no official link between media violence and real-life violence. For as many studies that suggest there are, there are just as many that suggest there are not. It's easy to side with the idea they are as every time a mass shooting happens, video games are the first thing brought up. However, in most cases violent media (or dreams as I'll go over later) was not involved.

I'm also just not talking out of my own opinion. I am a man of fact, so here is what I can do with some quick research. All of these articles are recent, unlike many that were published for the opposing side that date back to the early 2000's.

  • Article from Forbes that covers a study that showed no link between violence in media and in real life. Ironically, the study suggested that it was competitive games, like racing and gambling, that were more likely to lead to violence than something to the effect of Grand Theft Auto
  • NOVA, a well known scientific show in the US, published this article earlier this year. It presents a relatively unbiased viewpoint: we simply don't know. There are studies and psychologists that say yes, and others say no. They even mention the idea of violence being "contagious" or recreated from observation is not proven at all. Most of all: there is no uniform definition or way of documenting aggression, with studies as simple as having people fill in the word explo_e to see if they get "explode" or "explore" after playing a violent game.
  • A former FBI profiler warns against blaming violent media on acts of aggression, says in most cases there are other, deep-routed issues. It also cites an older study by the US government that found only 12% of those responsible for school shootings had any interest in violent video games.
  • An article from Psychology Today also points out inconsistencies in the way aggression is measured and also points out issues of sponsorship for both sides. Also points out that as of April youth violence is at a 40-year low despite increasingly realistic and violent media


tl;dr: There's no clear connection of violent media leading to violent behaviors, and even the "social learning" is in dispute when it comes to imitating violent behavior.

My point with all of that is to show the data are inconclusive at best. There has not been any consistent correlation from test to test. So, getting back on topic, the emulation of violence does not seem to have a clear link to real-life violence. And, considering the number of incredibly violent ND's most people have, it seems unlikely violent dreams lead to subversive behavior.

I am not discussing this in the case of a healthy outlet as Dragon is, to me it the reasoning does not matter very much. I will agree, people with violent tendencies are more likely to have and enjoy violence in their LD's, but the LD's are not the cause. They are the effect. Just like I, who can't even contemplate killing someone despite spending my entire life with "violent" games and movies, have not become any more violent or predisposed to crime, a healthy person is, in my opinion, in no danger of becoming that way irl.

Before you continue to worry, just take into consideration that there is no link or proof either way. Yes, lucid dreaming is uncharted territory and we don't know what the effects are. But that is the exact same thing that was said about video games, television, tabletop games (D&D makes you worship the Devil, don't ya know), comic books, and even regular ol' novels.



Current LD goal(s): Defeat Xander in our lucid duel!
back to top
AgentO
Lucid Initiate
Lucid Initiate
Posts: 65
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Last Visit: 16 Jun 2013
 
PostPosted: Thu 20 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

GreenDragon wrote:
I understand you find my stance distasteful, but I'm not sure I see my approach as the only one. I also fail totally to see how my stance could be responsible for 'atrocities' this just seems a bit hyperbolic to me and not really constructive to our discussion, it is still just a discussion of ideas right?

Excuse my previous use of sarcasm to stress a point.
Apparently, it was not understood. Allow me to explain:
What I meant to say is if everyone would think and behave like you do, you would've been 100% right.
But since that's not the case, other people react differently to different stimuli, and thus conflicts occur.
You being in a certain opinion or another, would hardly have an impact on world hunger or human rights violations around the globe.

GreenDragon wrote:
This is where I would firstly say that the parent or guardian has failed them by letting them be exposed to such content without appropriate support and guidance. I'd pretty much also deny the idea that they would suddenly find deep thrills in violent media. Ever seen how kids automatically react to things like kissing? I'd say your fears were unfounded. The kind of person who might view such media and be allured by it enough to pursue it further, is already damaged, most likely through real life experiences or mental issues. There is plenty of common-knowledge examples about this, those who bully other kids are usually bullied themselves just as one.

This is exactly what I mean. You tend to take the trivial or most common case as the only one, and dismiss the rest with other trivial claims like the ones above.
This is where I believe the fallacy of your argument lies.
I do not see a reason to repeat my stance as I have nothing new to say about it.
I will only say that, good kids with great parents can get addicted to drugs (for example), or get exposed without the parents' knowledge to various types of content.
There are many stages of development for the human mind and consciousness, and the amount of influence each experience has is unknown. Had it been known, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place. So dismissing it all so lightly is something I (for example) would never do.
In fact, given my own personal experience, I can definitely say that there is a discernible influence and I can point on such experiences that affected my growth and mentality. Of course these experiences are personal and I am not going to expose them. All I can say from my experience, that at least for me, that amount of impact an event has, depends on the level of importance I attributed to it as a kid. (subconsciously of course)

GreenDragon wrote:

Nature vs Nurture stuff yeah. My view is, it could be both or a mix of the two. Some are genetically predisposed towards aggression and dominant behaviour. I don't accept that, that predisposition however is caused by simply watching something violent. Fired up by it, yes, caused by it, no. I'd also argue that in those predisposed to aggressive and violent behaviour, need to learn at some point in their lives to understand and control that part of themselves. It's better for that sort of behaviour to be noticed by their acts in fantasy than in reality, so a responsible parent/guardian can react accordingly.


Here is exactly where I disagree with you. I do not believe our genes depict our behaviour and violent tendencies. I don't agree with all those science fiction movies that show a genetic test that can discern whether someone is more or less likely to develop violent tendencies. I believe much of such behavior is acquired.
This is the cause for our disagreement, I believe.

GreenDragon wrote:

For those who are older and engaging in violent media, I'd much sooner suggest they think about violence and what sort of person they want to be, and be around, than encourage them not to engage violent media. That seems endlessly more productive to me. For somebody who recognises the violence is fantasy and constrains that violence there; they are completely healthy and can live a deeply satisfying and pleasurable life. Even if there is a large portion of people who condemn them as sick psychos without understanding them.


What you say here requires a very high level of self awareness. One that maybe required from lucid dreamers, but not from the general population.
Also not everyone with such an awareness will choose to invest so much effort. Same as not all lucid dreamers control the dream, but just let it flow following it without disturbance.

Do not forget that most of the events that shape who we are take place in the subconscious level. Switching such events to the conscious level could be a life's work.



Current LD goal(s): Cooporate with my dream environment
back to top
matthewebbert
Novice dreamer
Novice dreamer
32
Posts: 47
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Last Visit: 20 Jun 2013
 
PostPosted: Thu 20 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

In lucid dreams, you can do anything, without consequence. I've done a lot of violent things in them.

back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Sat 22 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

I have to disagree that the typical person being exposed to violence in non reality form are effected. Even reality doesn't always dictate that people who were exposed heavily to violence even in life don't become so.

I grew up in a school where i was horribly harassed and bullied. We were a poor family but we were close, loving. Instead of becoming a violent person, i was more depressed than so. I grew up to where I am now as a very caring individual. I'm not in a hostile environment anymore, and our family is in a much better condition financially, etc.

I have a lot of friends who are gamers. I'm one of them. And one of our focused genres when we get together, in lan parties and even online are FPS and other competitive games. We also have an interest in horror, survival, and war type content such as movies and games. But my friends and I have never been violent, nor can i think of anyone I've ever met that has similar interests, become a violent person. I really do think that it depends on your own morals, and who you really are. I believe a large factor of me becoming who I am today is because real life experience - being in a loving family, strongly outweighed the violence I'm exposed to through media.

It's not like when someone dies in media that they die laughing, or cheering - encouraging that it's a good thing, or ok. If you're the type of person that can sympathize with their reaction, I think it only fortifies that violence is a terrible thing.

That all being said, I try to comfort and aid someone if they get a small cut on their finger. Though now that I'm on this topic, I'm very well interested in throwing a giant exploding fireball into a village to see how far I can throw the contents, because I know that it is not real.

So I truly do believe that if you become violent from being exposed to violence in a fantasy situation, then you're just not personally able to divide fantasy vs reality.

I probably repeated or ran around in circles in all this, but my bed time has long expired.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...
back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Sat 22 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

Ontop of that... Im not one to believe in these isolated tests with subjects... I've had an 80% chance to roll below 80, and It took me 4 rolls. If i had rolled about 1000 times, im sure it would better conclude that there is infact around 80 sides that I don't want it to roll on. So until these tests cover an extensive amount of people, I don't believe it can be called accurate.

It could very well be that the people they used for the test volenteered because they were acceptance of violence, or let it get into their head more than others.

Afterall. why would the common person want to be exposed to violent things if they disagreed with it.

-edit
I meant to say there's an 80% chance to roll under 80. not above.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...


Last edited by Lumessence on Wed 26 Jun, 2013; edited 1 time in total
back to top
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

AgentO wrote:
Excuse my previous use of sarcasm to stress a point.
Apparently, it was not understood. Allow me to explain:
What I meant to say is if everyone would think and behave like you do, you would've been 100% right.
But since that's not the case, other people react differently to different stimuli, and thus conflicts occur.
You being in a certain opinion or another, would hardly have an impact on world hunger or human rights violations around the globe.


Yes I understood your sarcasm, that was why I asked if this was still a discussion of ideas or if it had morphed into something else. Especially since your accusation of seeing my view as the only one, is exactly what you are doing by implying that you know some sort of objective truth about reality that I've missed. I've never said, I know I'm right, I know I could be mistaken. Your decision to use sarcasm such as you did though carries the implication that you are unmistakably right. Making this into an argument rather than a sharing of ideas. One that is totally pointless if all we are going to do is try to attack and undermine the others perspective as seemed to be the case with your sarcasm.

The fact is, both of us are talking from our perspective and both of us can be wrong. There isn't overwhelming scientific evidence either way as was elegantly illustrated in Rhewin's post.

Quote:
This is exactly what I mean. You tend to take the trivial or most common case as the only one, and dismiss the rest with other trivial claims like the ones above.
This is where I believe the fallacy of your argument lies.
I do not see a reason to repeat my stance as I have nothing new to say about it.
I will only say that, good kids with great parents can get addicted to drugs (for example), or get exposed without the parents' knowledge to various types of content.


Sure they can, but just being exposed isn't enough. I'm saying from my perspective the person (even if it was a child) needs to have serious issues with their life at a material level, for them to become violent in reality. I'm also saying that that experience on the material level is responsible, not the violent media. Lumessence experiences above really illustrate the importance of material experiences in formation of character.

Quote:
There are many stages of development for the human mind and consciousness, and the amount of influence each experience has is unknown. Had it been known, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place. So dismissing it all so lightly is something I (for example) would never do.
In fact, given my own personal experience, I can definitely say that there is a discernible influence and I can point on such experiences that affected my growth and mentality. Of course these experiences are personal and I am not going to expose them. All I can say from my experience, that at least for me, that amount of impact an event has, depends on the level of importance I attributed to it as a kid. (subconsciously of course)


To me this only seems to reinforces what I've been saying, violent media engaged in knowing it's a fantasy is not of high importance. Things threatening your physical security would be however and be the formative events not video games.

Quote:
Here is exactly where I disagree with you. I do not believe our genes depict our behaviour and violent tendencies. I don't agree with all those science fiction movies that show a genetic test that can discern whether someone is more or less likely to develop violent tendencies. I believe much of such behavior is acquired.
This is the cause for our disagreement, I believe.


I'm not saying it can only be caused by genetics, but certainly I am of the mind they play a role in it and peoples predispositions. Also in determining how different people react differently to the same stimuli. Two brothers can be raised in the same environment and wind up with massively different attitudes towards violence. Just as one person raised in a violent environment full of suffering and insecurity can still be less violent than another; raised in significantly better circumstances.

Quote:
What you say here requires a very high level of self awareness. One that maybe required from lucid dreamers, but not from the general population.
Also not everyone with such an awareness will choose to invest so much effort. Same as not all lucid dreamers control the dream, but just let it flow following it without disturbance.


I'm not convinced you give others enough credit, but I freely admit I try to see the world in a positive way, I much prefer that to seeing negativity everywhere. Nothing positive will come out of seeing life in that way, to some extent you'll spend your time absorbed in hopelessness whilst justifying your misery by characterizing it as a rejection of naive ideals. Of course there are a few, maybe even many who it will never be more than mindless fun, but not everybody. I still maintain that for those people, it does no harm so the net effect is positive.



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Wed 26 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

Dragon. Agent.

FIrst of all, I just thought I'd point out... You are both misunderstanding what the other is talking about...

I don't want to be putting words in peoples mouths, but this is what Im getting from you two.

Agent is saying that the effect of exposure to violent media may or may not make them a violent person, depending who that person is. People react differently to the same stimuli.

Dragon is saying that exposure to violence through fantasy is a good way to EXPLORE what violence is, and how you would react.

I don't believe people want to be violent by nature. And being exposed to the damage caused by violence, may make you rethink it. The other option is to commit them Irl, and find it out that way. Those who do not explore violence, will not know what it means or how it harms other people, so they might commit violence without truely recognizing what they are doing, Because they do not know..

What you should be debating, is whether or not acting violently through media will impact your behavior in a way that leans you more towards violence.

I think that If it does effect you at all, it will only bring out the person you really are inside. Which is most likely due to the ratio of good and bad experiences in life.
In my opinion, those who recognize life as the priority, will be most effected by life. Their reality experiences would greatly outweigh fantasy. But also is the trueth if it is the other way around. It really depends on which one you view as the most important, and not everyone has the same priority of fantasy vs life.

To merge your two ideas, this is what I have concluded from both your contributions:
Fantasy is a good way to explore violence, as opposed to experiences irl. But because different people respond differently, you will always get some people who become violent, some people who are impartial, and some people who know how much violence hurts, so they don't do it. If they are not exposed to violence, then their tendancies are very vague, and it would soley rely on who that person is. And to be honest, dragon had mentioned that violence is a part of survival, and this is true. If you encounter something unkown, you will be weary and want to defend yourself. Your first instinct is "am I in danger?" not "I wonder if it wants to play with me". So it's far more likely that you would resort to violence in a position that requires you to make a choice. Exposure through media will amplify your own 'morals' for lack of a better word.. So exposure to violence could make people very kind and empathetic, or it could turn them into very violent people.. But without exposure, due to the way life functions, you are actually more likely to resort to violence.

To my view, you are both very well correct, and not really arguing against each other... In the beginning, you guys were on the same track, but It only took a couple of posts near the beginning where this split into debating two different things... How you managed to continue to merge the views of two different things into one debate... nuu

You guys are both on the subject, drawing using two different shapes, but the same crayon, and then debating who's color is correct based on it's shape.

Am I not correct in this?

I urge you both to go back and read the first few posts you both made, and how you responded.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...
back to top
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

Quote:
What you should be debating, is whether or not acting violently through media will impact your behavior in a way that leans you more towards violence.


That is what we are discussing... eh

Quote:
To merge your two ideas, this is what I have concluded from both your contributions:
Fantasy is a good way to explore violence, as opposed to experiences irl. But because different people respond differently, you will always get some people who become violent, some people who are impartial, and some people who know how much violence hurts, so they don't do it.


What I'm saying is that, so far as I'm concerned those who become violent, do so because of causes other than the violent media they may have viewed. To me saying watching that film helped make them violent is like concluding that breathing air causes headaches because every person with a headache was breathing air. Perhaps even worse since violent people are more likely to be attracted to violent media.

Quote:
If they are not exposed to violence, then their tendancies are very vague, and it would soley rely on who that person is.


I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean here, no exposure to violent media wouldn't result in vagueness on attitudes to violence. From my perspective at least, attitude to violence is dictated by experience in life with a certain element of genetics and of course an element of interplay between the two.

I assert very strongly that it can be a nice safe sandbox to better understand oneself, or even just a useful place to offload those angry feelings healthily and make life more manageable. Also that neither of those things are in any way whatsoever bad, harmful or to be avoided. It could of course be addictive and stunt your growth in terms of handling it, but that's an entirely different topic. I'd still insist forcing yourself to avoid it in that eventuality is more harmful than good.

Quote:
And to be honest, dragon had mentioned that violence is a part of survival, and this is true. If you encounter something unkown, you will be weary and want to defend yourself. Your first instinct is "am I in danger?" not "I wonder if it wants to play with me". So it's far more likely that you would resort to violence in a position that requires you to make a choice.


This is a bit more about the chemical fight or flight response. I'm not sure it's as relevant when talking about attitudes to violence to be honest.

Quote:
Exposure through media will amplify your own 'morals' for lack of a better word.. So exposure to violence could make people very kind and empathetic, or it could turn them into very violent people.. But without exposure, due to the way life functions, you are actually more likely to resort to violence.


My point is that exposure to violent media doesn't make people anything. Life experiences, especially physical security (being physically threatened, fed, watered, sheltered, cared for and all the other life essentials) make people who they are. A healthy happy person isn't going to turn violent just from playing the most graphic, violent and realistic thing you can imagine, even for hours on end.

Conversely, somebody who sees little to live for, feels as though the world is against them or have a complete lack of empathy are extremely likely to become violent, even if you had them watching teletubbies all day... (In fact that would send probably even a sane person crazy, but I digress.)

Quote:
To my view, you are both very well correct, and not really arguing against each other... In the beginning, you guys were on the same track, but It only took a couple of posts near the beginning where this split into debating two different things... How you managed to continue to merge the views of two different things into one debate... nuu


Violent media being causative of violent behaviour or not, are mutually exclusive views, we can't both be right.

Quote:
You guys are both on the subject, drawing using two different shapes, but the same crayon, and then debating who's color is correct based on it's shape.

Am I not correct in this?


I'd have to say categorically no, I'm not insisting I'm correct, I'm responding to agent's views from the position of my own, in order to explore a difference of opinion. As I stated already, we can only talk about our views since there is no overwhelming scientific evidence either way.



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Sun 30 Jun, 2013  Reply with quote

GreenDragon wrote:

That is what we are discussing... eh


Firstly, I apologize for arguing by possibly putting words into others mouths.. And I reread through the posts. Im not sure where I decided that the topic had strayed. I suppose my confidence in myself is unfounded.

The first 2 paragraphs where I call names are the only two where I posted what I believed you were each talking about. Anything beyond that is my own view.

GreenDragon wrote:
Quote:
Fantasy is a good way to explore violence, as opposed to experiences irl. But because different people respond differently, you will always get some people who become violent, some people who are impartial, and some people who know how much violence hurts, so they don't do it.


What I'm saying is that, so far as I'm concerned those who become violent, do so because of causes other than the violent media they may have viewed. To me saying watching that film helped make them violent is like concluding that breathing air causes headaches because every person with a headache was breathing air. Perhaps even worse since violent people are more likely to be attracted to violent media.


I said this incorrectly. I should have been more specific. It is possible for some people to react differently than is common, but only under rare cercumsances. Such as unstable people may be influenced by it, but typically no, it does not have any impact.

GreenDragon wrote:

I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean here, no exposure to violent media wouldn't result in vagueness on attitudes to violence. From my perspective at least, attitude to violence is dictated by experience in life with a certain element of genetics and of course an element of interplay between the two.


I can't support my statement. At the time, I was thinking of a case where no one had been exposed to any kind of kindness, violence, or anything. If they grew up without being in any social situations, but... I'm pretty sure that wouldn't happen. Nor do I know for sure that it would.

GreenDragon wrote:
I assert very strongly that it can be a nice safe sandbox to better understand oneself, or even just a useful place to offload those angry feelings healthily and make life more manageable. Also that neither of those things are in any way whatsoever bad, harmful or to be avoided. It could of course be addictive and stunt your growth in terms of handling it, but that's an entirely different topic. I'd still insist forcing yourself to avoid it in that eventuality is more harmful than good.


I agree with this. What I'm saying is that experiencing violence in that sand box, I believe, based on who they have grown up to be in life, they will respond to it in different ways. Some may feel terrible after harming purposefully, others may have found it enjoyable. But I believe that in itself is based off real life experiences. Why do people usually become violent? Is it part of chemical? Or is it because they've been hurt? Perhaps they were rewarded for doing it. There might be other reasons, but there aren't many of those that really apply to media. Really apply to media. Sure, you're going to be thinking about violence for a little while after watching a violent movie, but it probably won't go any further than that. As far as I know, for a typical person, dreams have never effected their daily lives.
I know sometimes it has an impact for moments after you wake up, and maybe you did see some spectacular event that you find touching somehow. But violence? I'm a good person. But I did have a dream a while back where I was someone with power and I was abusing it. People, police, they were all trying to stop me and i just blew them away and cackled about it... I was tyrannical, but when i woke up, i was like.. "oh god! that was awful! How could i do such a thing!".,. while in that dream, i completely enjoyed it.

GreenDragon wrote:
This is a bit more about the chemical fight or flight response. I'm not sure it's as relevant when talking about attitudes to violence to be honest.


That may be true..

GreenDragon wrote:
My point is that exposure to violent media doesn't make people anything. Life experiences, especially physical security (being physically threatened, fed, watered, sheltered, cared for and all the other life essentials) make people who they are. A healthy happy person isn't going to turn violent just from playing the most graphic, violent and realistic thing you can imagine, even for hours on end.

Conversely, somebody who sees little to live for, feels as though the world is against them or have a complete lack of empathy are extremely likely to become violent, even if you had them watching teletubbies all day... (In fact that would send probably even a sane person crazy, but I digress.)


Yes. For the most part.. But it sounded like Agent was saying that it is possible, rather than that it is impossible.

Just making sure here, but are you, dragon, taking the side that it is never a cause for violence, under any circumstances? I would agree that typically media can not make someone violent, but it is possible. It has happened in the past. So to my view, it is mostly true that media will not cause violence.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...
back to top
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Jul, 2013  Reply with quote

Lumessence wrote:
I said this incorrectly. I should have been more specific. It is possible for some people to react differently than is common, but only under rare cercumsances. Such as unstable people may be influenced by it, but typically no, it does not have any impact.


I agree completely, only difference from what you say here seems to be that I label the 'rare circumstances' as being the cause of degeneration and not the media viewed.

Lumessence wrote:
Just making sure here, but are you, dragon, taking the side that it is never a cause for violence, under any circumstances? I would agree that typically media can not make someone violent, but it is possible. It has happened in the past. So to my view, it is mostly true that media will not cause violence.


It may meet with stiff opposition, but yes, that is what I'm saying. I disagree with the violent media being labelled causative. As I said above the 'circumstances' that you refer to, as far as I'm concerned are caused by other events aside from the violent media. I'd label those events as causative not the media. I'd also be interested to explore where you said it had happened before too. Although I suspect it could result in a tense emotion full discussion.

Many people seem eager to blame violent media for people becoming violent, because its neat, tidy and gives them something to campaign about banning. It makes the world simple for them to understand. The reality is much more complicated. There isn't one thing we can blame and set out to fix, people degenerate into violent behaviour for many reasons and some of them there isn't even blame we can fairly attribute to anyone, including the violent person themselves.

Violent dreams are not uncommon, even in the most placid and peaceful people. I also do no believe that anybody has ever lived without engaging in 'play' violence. In fact as I said earlier, in mice, being unable to engage in play fighting results in retardation of mental development which proves fatal in certain circumstances. I'd be very surprised if exposure to controlled violence didn't turn out to be fundamental to our development too. That doesn't justify exposing children to graphic violence of course, but it should give those campaigning for violent media to be banned or be considered socially distasteful or taboo, pause.



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Jul, 2013  Reply with quote

GreenDragon wrote:

I agree completely, only difference from what you say here seems to be that I label the 'rare circumstances' as being the cause of degeneration and not the media viewed.

It may meet with stiff opposition, but yes, that is what I'm saying. I disagree with the violent media being labelled causative. As I said above the 'circumstances' that you refer to, as far as I'm concerned are caused by other events aside from the violent media. I'd label those events as causative not the media. I'd also be interested to explore where you said it had happened before too. Although I suspect it could result in a tense emotion full discussion.


I was thinking about this earlier, and I do agree now. The cause wouldn't be the media. Even under the rare circumstances, those circumstances - I agree would be the cause. I think we react and are effected most significantly by real experiences. I don't believe people are born violent. I think there must be a reason to be that way, and I don't think violent media is a strong enough reason to be. Life just naturally outweighs fantasy, consciously or not.

As for when I said it had happened before, I misunderstood the columbine shooting. (typical.) I actually looked it up, and it wasn't really due to media. So no, I'm not aware of any other situation that involved violence from media.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...
back to top
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Jul, 2013  Reply with quote

Lumessence wrote:
As for when I said it had happened before, I misunderstood the columbine shooting. (typical.) I actually looked it up, and it wasn't really due to media. So no, I'm not aware of any other situation that involved violence from media.


I suspected that what you said might have been linked to one or more of those types of shootings, hence my feeling it would lead to a tense discussion. People are always highly strung when it comes to discussing things like that, and understandably so. I still maintain that in those instances the isolation from their peers, probable bullying and problems in their home-life were the causative issues and not the media they may or may not have engaged in. To commit acts like this one has to been pretty deeply absorbed in hate, and/or view others in a very cold dehumanised way. Sprites in a video game, or actors in films just aren't strong enough to inflict such dehumanisation. I suspect those who disagree, lack experience with severe bullying or other causative issues and don't realise just how painful such experiences are. Comparing that to violent media, or blaming violent media and ignoring those experiences is... overspannen



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Lumessence
Transcendent
Astral Explorer
Lumessence has successfully completed an LD4all Quest!
964
Posts: 420
Joined: 24 May 2011
Last Visit: 03 Feb 2019
Location: Letharli
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Jul, 2013  Reply with quote

I just recalled an interesting thing that relates very closely to the direct topic.
When I was in highschool, I was in a graphic design class. I had a friend nearby who was working on a few projects. He was amazing at creating animated works and adding special effects to videos. He made a wonderful video for the school for the student body officer elections. It included a light saber battle, one of the janitors mop handle turned into a lightsaber for it ^^. He did a lot for the school, got good grades, never got into any confrontations with people.
Hes now working for a major animation company. I think it was Dreamworks.
Sorry, tangent.
Regardless, he was a really good person. Humorous, respectful, and just down right fun.
He was a doom player. The school we attended was Jordan High, and he made a doom map called Jordoom. It was designed as our school in an old broken down version. The layout of the school was quite accurate. He ofcourse was required to remove it from online, and got introuble for it... Though Im sure it's still out there somewhere.

The point being, he made a horrible scene of our school, but he was a good person. He had nothing against the school, or anyone in it, nor would i suspect he ever would.



Current LD goal(s): Slow the Rain...
back to top
30
Chat Mods
Posts: 1444
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Last Visit: 26 Jul 2017
LD count: 13
Location: Hunting...
 
PostPosted: Fri 05 Jul, 2013  Reply with quote

Lumessence wrote:
Regardless, he was a really good person. Humorous, respectful, and just down right fun.
He was a doom player. The school we attended was Jordan High, and he made a doom map called Jordoom. It was designed as our school in an old broken down version. The layout of the school was quite accurate. He ofcourse was required to remove it from online, and got introuble for it... Though Im sure it's still out there somewhere.

The point being, he made a horrible scene of our school, but he was a good person. He had nothing against the school, or anyone in it, nor would i suspect he ever would.


This sounds like the typical knee-jerk reaction to anything involving violence and schools. I seriously doubt anyone damaged enough to consider committing homicide, is going to be playing out that fantasy in a video game and if they are, it's not going to suddenly make it any more likely that they do it. Unfortunately the majority seem to want to stomp out all thoughts or ideas of violence at school as a means to convince themselves they are doing all they can to stop it. If only things were so simple.

I really hope your friend didn't suffer consequences too severe for making his map...
What a world where an act of creativity can earn such scorn.



Current LD goal(s): Become a Dragon! RAWR!
back to top
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

print  

All times are GMT + 2 Hours
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB
LD4all ~ spreading the art and knowledge of lucid dreaming online since 1996 ~