The Ranting/Debate Thread

[Cappy]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

@Cappy, are you going to edit that post, make a new one or you're done?
It's been more than an hour, since Vuki had something to say i'm going ahead with him.

I'm tired, it's 4:11 am where I am right now, I'll probably give a response tomorrow when I'm more clear headed. Besides, I'd rather let Vuki and Sinful have their space.

 

[Exofluke]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Yeah, their aim would improve fractionally due to hand eye co-ordination improvements

That's all I meant to suggest.

------------

@JohnDoe

You are questioning fantasy and reality when you say that morals in fantasy are able to correlate with reality's morals, outside of mere thoughts.

 

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Fair enough, but it's a fraction, and anyone thinking they'd be a marksman because they're awesome at FPS games should probly dunk their head in ice water. That's my point.

 

[JohnDoe]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

@JohnDoe

You are questioning fantasy and reality when you say that morals in fantasy are able to correlate with reality's morals, outside of mere thoughts.

Nope, i'm saying that morals in the real world are appliable in the fantsy world, it's the complete opposite.

Btw, i was wondering why no one mentioned that thos pretty little things called rifles have something called recoil, back when i was doing my(law enforced) military service they used to at least, now, even if you have the best eye-hand cohordination and you know how to hold a gun and know how to use it, i doubt you would be able to shoot correctly if you never held one. Even an untrained adult would have troubles keeping his/her hand steady with most guns, i seriously doubt a kid would be able to shoot straight with a rifle even if he played 4 milion hours at the best FPS game, some guns could even send him flying backward just because he's not heavy enough to withstand the recoil. You don't lear how to factor the recoil of a gun by playing games, you need a real gun for that and recoil is the most important thing to factor when aiming. The kid in the video almost got a black eye for holding the rifle like an idiot. That's all i had to say, i'm out for tonight.

 

[Newbie]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

This has been going on for far too long, I think, and people are taking it way too serious.

You must accept that there is a line between fantasy and reality. This is the core of most games, stories, and modern entertainment.

There is such a thing as priming; repeated exposure to an idea can make one more comfortable with the idea. However, this should not override morals or values, and to think so is silly.

What goes on in the mind is separate from what goes on in reality, just like what goes on in certain aspects of your life is separate form others. You are not the same person around your friends as you are around your parents, as a general rule. That you can have thoughts of rape, or even be excited by these thoughts, has no bearing on the world unless you try and bring these thoughts to fruition.

You can not be a bad person for what you think. If it is the case you think of rape and murder all day and yet have never raped or murdered, this is a heroic effort that deserves recognition, and also you need help. But having a thought ever so often that would be frowned upon by society is not wrong, and is not uncommon. How many times have you thought to yourself that you'd like to kill a specific person?

If the fear is that allowing rape to make a profit makes it more normal and therefore more acceptable; first, take a look at half of porn ever (HYPERBOLE), but second, violent crime rates overall have been going down in the US since 1993 according to wikipedia. That's about the time I first got my hands on an NES, when they were brand spanking new. Correlation does not equal causation, but it's interesting to note.

 

[Exofluke]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Nope, i'm saying that morals in the real world are appliable in the fantsy world, it's the complete opposite.

It's the same thing. You're saying there is a correlation. However, this correlation is based on our thought process. There's no other way for even morals to apply, without our ability to do so.

So.. once again... you're simply questioning intelligence; one's ability to understand what they're thinking and doing.

 

[Pale]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I think I've been misunderstood.

I don't mean to imply that playing Call of Duty makes you a better shot. There's zero logic to support that, see Sinful's posts.

I mean, that there is a mental block against shooting someone imposed by society. Playing a simulation of shooting someone, EVEN if you're aware it's fantasy, still erodes that block. It makes it -morally- easier to do.

It doesn't make you more likely to do it. Or more inclined. Or want to. Just makes it easier if you do.

Newbie seems to have gotten closest to my intent with his suggestion of priming. And obviously, in a "normal" person, very far from raping/killing, the effects are negligible.

But what about "borderline" cases. Someone that MIGHT go out and rape, but might go out and... lose their nerve, or change their mind, or otherwise get scared off? Could this incremental priming effect be enough to sway them? And how many people are we talking about here?

P

 

[Exofluke]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I mean, that there is a mental block against shooting someone imposed by society. Playing a simulation of shooting someone, EVEN if you're aware it's fantasy, still erodes that block. It makes it -morally- easier to do.

That doesn't make any sense. Awareness is what decides everything about us, from cause&effect awareness to thought-process awareness. Now of course our surroundings make up who we are, so someone who grows up in the Bronx probably won't be anything like someone who grew in the Hollywood Hills.

Yet we all have one thing in common, we can all commit ourselves to figure things out. Now this leads me to another video...

You must be registered to see the links

. Science being the best method we have, which is absolute. If such a method can show morals, then where does society set? Further more, where does priming set?

 

[Newbie]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

The fact that a law exists doesn't have much bearing on some people. If it were the case that morality were scientifically discerned, it would just give us a list of rules to follow that people can break. Society sits wherever people agree to let it, and priming still exists.

 

[Pale]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Eh. I'm twelve minutes into this Youtube video, and I'm getting suspicious.

He keeps talking about peaks and troughs of human experience. He starts with the presumption that the experience is based on the conscious experience, that we sympathise more with monkeys because we think they feel more. No, we sympathise with monkeys because they look like us. End of.

Then he makes some very fleeting references to psychological balance, to appropriate healthy states. Look at the bit where he puts up all the women's nude mags, and asks if that's healthy. What exactly defines how healthy or unhealthy something like that is?

He seems to have some sort of vague argument pointed towards all of us having a generally enjoyable, balanced time. But if everyone enjoys themselves all the time, there's no responsibility, no work - the Lotus Eaters are a perfectly acceptable model of society.

Science can't define morals. It can point haphazardly in the right direction, sometimes. Like the definition between food and poison. Even then it's sketchy. Tiny amounts of poison are often powerful cures.

As for awareness... well. I think I'll take up the point that while -awareness- does define us, -conscious- awareness does not. Things can easily affect you without you being aware of them.

Take... okay. A person with a strong phobia of heights, shown a video shot from POV, of someone climbing a cliff-face, frequently looking back down over the edge. As far as I'm aware, the phobia still triggers, despite the awareness that there is no danger.

Another example of culturally imposed blocks, like the one I'm talking about. In a strongly Islamic nation, say, Iran, women wear veils and full-body clothing. Now, if you take someone brought up in that culture, and take their veils away - almost universally, they have a fear reaction, understandably. It's new, it's uncertain, it's different.

If you import them to a country where women don't wear the veil, then after a while, take away their veils... bang. Much less anxiety and fear. Some women even remove the veil of their own accord. Because they've seen other people not wearing the veil, eroding their own desire to wear it. It's like peer pressure.

I hope I'm making sense here.

P

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

some guns could even send him flying backward just because he's not heavy enough to withstand the recoil.

Do you know anything about physics?

 

[Nunu]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

hooker are you saying you could one hand a recoiless rifle?

 

[Incubus]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

hooker are you saying you could one hand a recoiless rifle?

Well, clearly it has no recoil, just look at the name.

Hurr.

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Do you know anything about physics?

I'm not sure quite how you mean that, but you don't need to know anything about physics to know that heavy recoil can floor someone when you've seen it a few dozen times already.

You must be registered to see the links

If you hit a kid in the shoulder with a strong recoil he goes down just the same as if you hit him in the shoulder with a club or anything else.

[Edit] For anyone wondering about how much a "recoiless rifle" recoils, I believe this is one doing so.

You must be registered to see the links

 

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Do you know anything about physics?

Do you know anything about firearms? A shotgun or powerful rifle can really kick you back if you don't know how to wield it properly, and if you don't have the strength, even knock you on your ass.

hooker are you saying you could one hand a recoiless rifle?

Well, clearly it has no recoil, just look at the name.

Hurr.

And sorry Inky, but recoiless rifle is a misleading name. Sure most of the recoil it would have has been reduced due to much of the pressure going out the open back, but it still has a large crack. It's a damn anti-vehicle weapon after all. This is before bringing weight into the factor as well.

You must be registered to see the links

The above video is two Canadian soldiers training with the Carl Gustav. They're using the training rounds which as I recall don't have as big a punch, and the second man is helping to stabilize the first, yet you can still see a bit of recoil there.

They could have been much faster at doing everything too... but they're training.

 

[Hentaispider]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I guess that was a misinterpretation on my part, seeing as everyone else seems to think that "flying backwards" doesn't mean what it literally says, instead meaning "fall backwards."

 

[Unknown Squid]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I reckon if the soldier in the second video I posted had been strapped to that cannon, flying would probably be a good term for it even in a literal sense, but yeah I had started to think that was where the issue was.

 

[Sinfulwolf]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I guess that was a misinterpretation on my part, seeing as everyone else seems to think that "flying backwards" doesn't mean what it literally says, instead meaning "fall backwards."

In this case yes. I don't think I've ever heard of anyone actually "flying" backwards. However I have seem people fall a few feet backwards.

 

[moomoo78]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

Well, clearly it has no recoil, just look at the name.

Hurr.

And sorry Inky, but recoiless rifle is a misleading name.

In Inkies defense dear I do believe the "Hurr' on the end of the his post signifies sarcasm.

 

[JohnDoe]

Re: The Ranting/Debate Thread

I guess that was a misinterpretation on my part, seeing as everyone else seems to think that "flying backwards" doesn't mean what it literally says, instead meaning "fall backwards."

What you saw fall backwards was a grown up man, an average kid is not that heavy, for obvious reasons i can't prove it with a video...

It's the same thing. You're saying there is a correlation. However, this correlation is based on our thought process. There's no other way for even morals to apply, without our ability to do so.

So.. once again... you're simply questioning intelligence; one's ability to understand what they're thinking and doing.

Not exactly, i'm arguing the fact that the morals you have in the real world, i'm not talking about what you show to others, but what you really think is right in the real world is appliable to what you think, if you are completely sure that something is wrong in the real world, then obviously you shouldn't be imagining of raping someone, because that though would be repugnant. If in your mind you can think of raping someone, that means that the morals you have about real life events are not completely against those events, since they leave you a loop-hole to imagine. This in no way means that you will go raping people if you think about it, because most people will use "reason" to subdue these impulses and keep the act in the imaginary world, that's the inteligence you keep talking about(i call it reason, but you can consider it the same), but that's no where i stand.
The simple fact you have to use reason to subdue an immoral though to keep it for surfacing in the real world, means there is a part of you that you consider bad(if you considered it good you wouldn't be fighting it), the fact you differentiate between good and bad inside your mind, prove that there a form of moral code you use to chose what is good and can surface from what is bad and must remain hidden, thus morals stick to the imaginary as a way to decide how you will let your subconcious impulses reach the real world.
I'm not questioning reason, or intelligence, because that's how you apply morals, i'm saying that morals are applied to the imaginary too.

Science can answer moral questions[/URL]. Science being the best method we have, which is absolute. If such a method can show morals, then where does society set? Further more, where does priming set?

Ok, i too belive in science to find answers, but you seem take sience as an extreme form of perfection that it really is not, my main fields of work are microbiology and biochemistry so i can say i have direct contact with the way science works, and it is not by all means absolute. Every years, every few months at times, theories previously thought correct are discarded and replaced with more updated ones, or completely different ones, this process happens because of the

You must be registered to see the links

of studying phenomenons.
In doing so you are limited by your current knowledge and technology level, much like people in ancient times saw a lightning and said it's god while now that we know what atoms are we can tell how it works and even replicate it, in science rarely there are absolutes and with the advancing of technologies sometime these absolutes are not completely reliable, an example of this is how just about a century ago it was considered impossible to solve the square root of a negative number in math, now we have imaginary numbers to justify a few practical events in electrical engineering.
Science is ever evolving and there are new discoveries continuosly, it's far from perfect because human beings are not perfect, it's still the best way we have to acquire knowledge and answer but a as whole is not absolute.

That doesn't make any sense. Awareness is what decides everything about us, from cause&effect awareness to thought-process awareness. Now of course our surroundings make up who we are, so someone who grows up in the Bronx probably won't be anything like someone who grew in the Hollywood Hills.

Yet we all have one thing in common, we can all commit ourselves to figure things out. Now this leads me to another video...

You must be registered to see the links

You must be registered to see the links