Games, wasting of life?

[Finis]

People are different. Some are more/less prone to addiction, more/less intelligent, react to violence differently, distinguish reality from fantasy differently, obsessive or not, more or less need for social interaction, physically/mentally healthy or not, have an imagination or not, etc.

So games or any activity might be fine for some and not for others.

Kind of like a drug addict

Exactly. Trouble from playing games or any other activity comes from addiction or obsession.

i've seen several reports on studies

"Studies" are unreliable. They are often commissioned or produced by activist or agenda groups that get, or simply invent, exactly the results they want -- support for their views regardless of the facts. Probably it has always been that way. Even the slightest examination of the alleged methods or data, when it is even available, shows that they were fabricated and/or constructed to produce a predetermined result rather than than find facts or at least so poorly crafted that any results are meaningless. Any real effort to find out the truth about anything just gets lost in the sea of lies. Further, a study is not an experiment (which are also often corrupted) and if honestly done might at best be a hint that further investigation could be productive.

[Karthogen]

For an example of a very bad study.....

Interveiw: 500,000 prisoners currently surving time in a corrections facility. ages 18 - 30. Did you play video games when you were a child? answer yes to 85% - video games cause crime.

Now if you look at what I grew up with, Cartoons. I still say Tom and Jerry is more violent than 90% of the cartoons out today.

[Kurt]

For an example of a very bad study.....

Interveiw: 500,000 prisoners currently surving time in a corrections facility. ages 18 - 30. Did you play video games when you were a child? answer yes to 85% - video games cause crime.

Now if you look at what I grew up with, Cartoons. I still say Tom and Jerry is more violent than 90% of the cartoons out today.

Yes, that's right, Karth. But there's a difference, and it's significant.

I'm guessing you're about my vintage. If so, we sat and watched Tom and Jerry in a darkened theatre as part of a family night out. We knew it was a cartoon. We knew beyond a doubt that it was merely colourful entertainment to make us laugh. It lasted about three minutes, and always ended on a positive note. We had no input or influence over the events in it.

Compare that to video games, where you actively participate and actually, (or should I say virtually), perform the violent acts yourself. The "happy ending" is your survival and the body count you rack up. And you can indulge in that vicarious violence for as long as you want. There's no safety valve except your own self-control. And if observations are accurate, gamers seem to lose all semblance of self-control or identity.

Most definitely not a good thing.

[Kurt]

"Studies" are unreliable. They are often commissioned or produced by activist or agenda groups that get, or simply invent, exactly the results they want -- support for their views regardless of the facts. Probably it has always been that way. Even the slightest examination of the alleged methods or data, when it is even available, shows that they were fabricated and/or constructed to produce a predetermined result rather than than find facts or at least so poorly crafted that any results are meaningless. Any real effort to find out the truth about anything just gets lost in the sea of lies. Further, a study is not an experiment (which are also often corrupted) and if honestly done might at best be a hint that further investigation could be productive.

Just as it's risky to generalise about the causes of social problems, it's also risky to make blanket statements about "studies" of those problems. When you say, "they are often done by groups that invent the results they want", you may indeed be right in a number of cases. But you can't simply proceed from there to conclude that all studies are therefore suspect, which is what you seem to be suggesting. Your opening sentence was a very unequivocal "studies are unreliable".

Your post does seem to lean towards the notion that all studies are intrinsically faulty and flawed, and therefore can be safely ignored.

I don't think it's logical to take that view. Your point that people with an agendum might "discover" certain results that coincide with their views may be true in certain cases. But it is equally true that correct and valid results of studies will often be ignored or discredited by other people whose agenda they don't happen to suit.

[LeonRegis]

Hello Kurt is right, you can't generalize!

Besides studies that talks about games that create psycho I think that it's too difficult and we can't prohibite it just because you have 1 in 1.000.000 to become an psycho (but happens). Anyway it's undeniable that violent games affects in EVERYONE! No one is safe, I'll mention a few ones collateral effects, if you want search.

Risk of cardiovascular diseases, it's caused because when you are playing a game the realist is so much that your brain interpret a CS match to a war and your heart starts to pulse rapidly (Of course the beats are not the same as a war, but are higher than normal)

Violent Behaviors, it involves games and movies when you see a situation repeatedly you think is normal and banal (I'm not saying that you will get a knife and go out stabbing everyone, but will involve in fights and push peoples easily)

Inhibiting emotions, like in the effect above you will be a blooded person and when see you participate of violent acts will be affected less than others normal people


I hope you understand. I play violent games one time per week (I try not) you just need moderation.

Thanks

[Finis]

Kurt, your post is a good example of some fake study tactics. I doubt that you did that deliberately and don't mean to imply that you did.

[LeonRegis]

It's easy to realize that studies always have an sponsorship and usually it tends to be towards to the sponsor... But it's not unanimous, it's the same to say that all music success are launched by a Studio and not because of the quality of the music, but happens and a lot, so we just need to filtrate. Some months ago I read that smoke have a benefit if used correctly drinks too... So I just discard it

Thanks

[Kurt]

Kurt, your post is a good example of some fake study tactics. I doubt that you did that deliberately and don't mean to imply that you did.

Finis, I take it you mean when I said "But it is equally true that correct and valid results of studies will often be ignored or discredited by other people whose agenda they don't happen to suit."

I wasn't claiming that's a proven truth or empirical knowledge based upon any study. Rather, it's based upon my own observation of various people I've known. I expect you've probably had the same experience. If you haven't, you're lucky.

I think it's one of the many frustrations of life that we sometimes cannot convince others of things we know to be true, because they simply will not entertain any notion that conflicts with their personal wants and/or needs. You've probably noticed that.

Raising children is one example that immediately comes to mind. But I also meant it in the broader sense. For instance, I doubt there exists a single individual who gave up smoking on the basis of the Surgeon-General's report!

I could give you a personal case in point, but it's not really in keeping with the main purpose of this forum.

[Kurt]

It's easy to realize that studies always have an sponsorship and usually it tends to be towards to the sponsor... But it's not unanimous, it's the same to say that all music success are launched by a Studio and not because of the quality of the music, but happens and a lot, so we just need to filtrate. Some months ago I read that smoke have a benefit if used correctly drinks too... So I just discard it

Thanks

Yeah, I love it when a "new" report or "study" comes out that contradicts a previous "report". Last year, eating too many eggs was unhealthy; this year, it's good for you. Last year, alcohol does damage even in small amounts; this year, a glass of red wine a day is good for cardiac health. Last year, high protein diets were harmful; this year, high carbohydrate diets are the villain.. and so on.

The best criterion to apply to a Study is to ask the simple question; "Who stands to make MONEY from it?"

If no beneficiary is apparent or comes to mind, it's probably safe to assume the Study's results are valid.

But its validity isn't necessarily a guarantee that people will accept it. People will believe only what they want to believe.

[froo]

I haven't played any games in quite a long time.
If my dvd burner worked I'd install Doom3. Yeah it's pretty outdated
but that's the last game I bought. But the dvd burner was a CompUsa 'special' P.O.S.
that apparently doesn't work worth nothin. It worked when I first bought it, up in
New England. But it went downhill after the move to Virginia (much like a lot
of things). Won't even read dvd's. What a bargain. When I get a chance I will replace it,
and destroy this piece of junk with zest.

I take gym classes like weight training, aerobics, kickboxing, and yoga to clear my mind.
We also walk/run at the high school track. It's a lot better for me than a game TBH.