| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mtwieg
Trick Member
Joined: 06 Sep 2004
Location: Ù
٠اÙÙØ§Ø¶Ø Ø§ÙÙ Ùا اعب اÙجÙÙÙ |
40.  Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:32 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| wow, you guys really get worked up over random debates. I wouldn't be surprised if inzumaland1 wrote his posts by throwing furniture at the keyboard from accross the room. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
!!!!
Trick Member
Joined: 28 Sep 2003
Location: in a haus lolo! |
| 41. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| inzumaland1 wrote: |
1. Not ALL people who play DDR view it as an absolute necessity. I think this is quite obvious, and for you to assume that I did not assume this already is counterproductive to the direction that I am trying to take this discussion. No need to dwell on the fact that YOU individually do not find it a necessity, but there are those, in general, who do, and that is the focus of my discussion. |
Good. Glad that you realized that.
| Quote: | | 2. If we can deduce that our view of playing DDR is not in any way flawed, then we have a problem. Because you see, on the one hand, there are those who will try to debunk my statements with individual examples that do not hold for all of the population. On the other hand, there are those that see the implied truth that comes with playing DDR; and these are the ones that understand that the conflicting views of our society is in question. |
When you word your point this way, it makes a little more sense. However, it's saying the same thing as your first point: Flawed DDR views/perceptions aren't true for everyone, but, do exsist among certain groups of people.
One thing I'm interested in is how you're tying DDR to a generalization of society. The point you're making in your other paragraphs is that people have a flawed view of this game, and it seems as if you're trying to say, "they take it too seriously." How this connects to a model of human behavior, I'm not sure. Maybe you could clear this up.
| Quote: | | 3. The struggle between mysticism and personality is apparent. And this is not on an individual basis. This is a wholistic view of society. Society's personality drives us to achieve, and this becomes one outlet. Society's personality is what creates the necessity, though it does not exist in all people, it has at one point or another existed. This we cannot deny. |
This I don't understand. It's not clear which definition of mysticism you're using, but, either way, I'm not seeing how you can connect pure speculation to a personality. I do agree with "Society's personality drives us to achieve, and this becomes one outlet", as this can be exemplified by the people who have bunches and bunches of great scores on this very forum. But, again, you seem to just be returning to your original point: this necessity exsists in some people, but not in all cases.
That's my .02 for now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AK (Vanilla x Mint Mix)
Trick Member
![]()
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Location: Looking up catgirls and such... >.> |
| 42. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| There it is again! In inzumaland1's post! "AXIOMATIC VERDACITY!!!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
!!!!
Trick Member
Joined: 28 Sep 2003
Location: in a haus lolo! |
| 43. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mtwieg wrote: | | wow, you guys really get worked up over random debates. I wouldn't be surprised if inzumaland1 wrote his posts by throwing furniture at the keyboard from accross the room. |
I don't see anyone getting worked up.
He's just making points, and we're giving our opinions. That's all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spike
Administrator
Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Location: Denver |
| 44. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
There is someone in this thread named Spike? |
That would be me.
| Quote: | | wow, you guys really get worked up over random debates. I wouldn't be surprised if inzumaland1 wrote his posts by throwing furniture at the keyboard from accross the room. |
Please refrain from making future pointless posts.
| Quote: | | I pity you because this material is obviously way beyond your comprehension. |
Thanks for proving my point. Make a comment like that again and you'll be warned for flamebait.
| Quote: |
Not ALL people who play DDR view it as an absolute necessity. I think this is quite obvious, and for you to assume that I did not assume this already is counterproductive to the direction that I am trying to take this discussion. |
Then don't make claims that we all do. Say "some do, and those who do are faced with:" Make a claim that everyone that is a DDR player views it as a necessity, and I'm going to refute that.
| Quote: |
If we can deduce that our view of playing DDR is not in any way flawed, then we have a problem. |
And that view would be...what exactly? That it's viewed as a need? How is it viewed as a need?
| Quote: |
Because you see, on the one hand, there are those who will try to debunk my statements with individual examples that do not hold for all of the population. |
You yourself just said that the statements you're making don't hold for all of the population.
| Quote: |
On the other hand, there are those that see the implied truth that comes with playing DDR; and these are the ones that understand that the conflicting views of our society is in question. |
You still haven't spelled out what that truth is.
| Quote: |
Society's personality drives us to achieve, and this becomes one outlet. |
So then there isn't a need to play DDR. There's a need to achieve and DDR is the outlet. See why I asked you to clarify? The point you just made is different than the one you made before.
| Quote: |
The struggle between mysticism and personality is apparent. |
Why don't you make the case anyways, because it won't be apparent to everyone. That and you haven't mentioned any struggle between mysticism and personality until now. You're switching points again.
| Quote: |
Knowing these 4 things, it is clear that there is a contradiction. Now you might ask yourself, how can they all be true? Well, it's actually quite simple. The inherent flaw that exists in the way we view playing DDR is the core subject of this contradiction. |
So they're all true, and yet there's an inherent flaw. And then there's a contradiction. So how can two things with a flaw be true? How can there be a contradiction and yet have four things be true?
If you want to argue something you have to make a point. Call it your "thesis." So tell me: what is your thesis? That "The way we view DDR is inherently flawed?" What is the view? You still haven't stated it. You make a bunch of statements but don't explain them. Apparently because it's "obvious" or "easy to see." But it's not because you're the only one that can theoretically see them. Oh, let me guess. If we can't then we're "not smart enough" to see them? Uh huh. Enjoy thinking to yourself.
You have one more post to make some sense. If you don't then I will lock this thread for wasting everyone's time. The only real response to my post you made was "You're not smart enough, GEEZ I obviously didn't mean that." Then you didn't expand at all on your posts. You just switched a couple points. Expand on your actual point or the thread is gone.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Agent J
Trick Member
Joined: 29 Feb 2004
Location: Dimension X |
| 45. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| inazumaland1 wrote: | | axiomatic verdacity |
Zuh?! o_O Ok, this one confused me so much I just had to try to figure out what it means. Let's see, "axiomatic" looks like it comes from "axiom" which I think means something along the lines of "something that's known from experience to be true" and "verdacity"... um, I don't think that's a word but "veracity" is, and that means truth... so I'm getting "Truth that is known from experience to be true." Hmm, doesn't sound quite right. To the dictionary!
axiomatic- "1: evident without proof or argument; "an axiomatic truth""
veracity- " 1. Adherence to the truth; truthfulness. See Synonyms at truth.
2. Conformity to fact or truth; accuracy or precision: a report of doubtful veracity.
3. Something that is true."
So "axiomatic veracity" is "Truth that is evident without proof or argument." Aww nutbunnies, I'm even more confused now than when I started! o_O
For real though, your argument concnerning DDR's flaw of "axiomatic veracity" doesn't hold up for me. Right now, the problem is a lack of clarity in your argument, I think. For one:
| inazumaland1 wrote: | | When we are viewing this clash in interests (our necessity to play DDR and our need to see it as unnecessary) only then can we realize that there is an inherent flaw in our view of playing DDR. |
So our view of playing DDR's flaw is that we feel DDR is necessary but at the same time we also feel it necessary to regard it as unnecessary? Or is it that we feel it is necessary when it isn't? My counterpoint to either argument is the same, however: What does it matter? This philosophy strikes me as something that could be applied to any hobby: building models, restoring cars, knitting, coin collecting, etc. Furthermore, how can this flaw be something that's true without proof or evidence when we don't realize it? Regardless, this leads me to another question regarding this: If we then realize this flaw, what are the further implications? Are we just supposed to stop playing DDR, then? Or do we keep playing and are just now aware of this idea? I say idea because I don't feel it's true.
| inazumaland1 wrote: | | 2. If we can deduce that our view of playing DDR is not in any way flawed, then we have a problem. Because you see, on the one hand, there are those who will try to debunk my statements with individual examples that do not hold for all of the population. On the other hand, there are those that see the implied truth that comes with playing DDR; and these are the ones that understand that the conflicting views of our society is in question. |
I already asked this question, but I'll say it again, rephrased- What, then, does it mean if we deduce that there is a flaw? I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, but does it imply some deeper understanding of societal conflicts or something? Would you go and apply this philosophy to all video games in general? I have other questions, but they're all dependent on the answer to this question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AK (Vanilla x Mint Mix)
Trick Member
![]()
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
Location: Looking up catgirls and such... >.> |
| 46. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Axiomatic verdacity is more fun. ^^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spike
Administrator
Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Location: Denver |
| 47. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AK (Vanilla x Mint Mix) wrote: | | Axiomatic verdacity is more fun. ^^ |
I told you not to postwhore. And you did. So a warned user is you.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pantera
Trick Member
Joined: 01 Feb 2004
Location: ¯\(º_o)/¯ |
| 48. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is it just me, or is this thread just an excuse for inzumaland1 to use the word "inherent"?
That just cries "I'VE WATCHED THE MATRIX A LOT".
EDIT: After reading more, I'd like to point out that the only "constructive discussion" that can possibly occur from this is to point out the obvious flaws in his theory on flaws. Thankfully, Spike has already done that for the rest of us.
Thanks, Spike, you save my fingers wear and tear.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Legendary Luke
Trick Member
Joined: 07 Oct 2004
|
| 49. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Phat Killa T-Rod wrote: | | nigga yous a genius |
lol. What are you guys talking about.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nick.
Trick Member
Joined: 09 Jul 2002
Location: Studio city, CA |
| 50. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| axiomatic veracity means a fact that is well known. as in "we hold these truths to be self evident" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uouuÉ
Trick Member
Joined: 10 Jun 2004
|
| 51. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it's a fucking video game with a foot controller.
why don't you develop a philosophy for why just about all of the online FPS players are such assholes.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spike
Administrator
Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Location: Denver |
| 52. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| annon wrote: | it's a fucking video game with a foot controller.
why don't you develop a philosophy for why just about all of the online FPS players are such assholes. |
Penny Arcade already did that with the internet in general. It's called the "Greater Internet Fuckwad theory."
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spike
Administrator
Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Location: Denver |
| 53. Posted: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And I'm locking this thread. Because unfortunately for him (and fortunately for us) he will no longer have the ability to retort.
The philosophical implications of this banning must be astounding.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
Forums FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
