https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWH V_Wi5cf4 Is it true /r9

I guess

They force their will and actions on NPCs and characters that cannot deny them

Is this the guy who made Linux? Linux has no games so makes sense he would say this.

>>34943066
zizek: noted linux developer

>>34943066
That's Slavoy Zizek, the greatest philosophy of all tme you infidol

>>34943144
Modern philosophers are worthless because everyone already thought up the good philosophies

>>34943231
That's a philosophical statement.

>>34943248
Yeah and I'm worthless, just proved my point

>>34943257
This would also imply that your point was wrong fampai

so if I mostly play VNs about saving broken girls from their misery, am I actually one of the best people alive, a true hero, a real human being?

>>34942873
the male body and psyche is made for war and conquest. since we longer need war and conquest the videogames help pacify our vestigial war-brains, they are 100% necessary for modern society to continue functioning peacefully

>>34943066
is this guy on to something..? are stallman and zizek actually the same person - the same being?

>>34943275
Yes senpai. You wish to save others, and help, live out your compassionate site. You identify with those who suffer.

You're a good soul.

>>34943289
adding to this, sports have probably served a similar function since long ago, but videogames are a nice way for us weak and uncoordinated betamales to feel powerful as well so we don't go crazy and shoot up a mall or something

>>34943346
>>34943289
Pseudoscience and and a superficial naive reading, as Zizmeme points out.

>>34942873
>"Slavoj Zizek claims that gamers are brutal rapists"
>in the video he never says that

it really makes you think

>>34943066
>Is this the guy who made Linux? Linux has no games so makes sense he would say this.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!

File: ezra-pound1.jpg (18KB, 300x397px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x397px

>>34943231
"Guide to Kulchur"-era ezra pound wants a word with you, fggt

>>34943381
sounds like you didn't understand what he said, then, because i pretty much just agreed with him. men ARE war-like by nature (our "true self" as he calls it), and videogames are a way to let out some of our natural aggression in a socially acceptable and harmless away.

>>34943391
Also you posted the link here so you can get free views for your new uploaded video with controversial, misleading title

go fuck yourself

I think the truth of the matter is somewhere inbetween. The constrictions of society cause the need for the intense brutality of the video game persona. It is not that this intense brutality is the 'true self', it is simply an opposite reaction to the repression of social conventions.

>>34943398

*tips penguin toy*

>>34943485
This implies that only wargames existed and that people only played wargames. Since i enjoy managing and strategy games, mostly peaceful, am i therefore not a male? How about people in past times who did neither fight in war nor participate in sports, and this was the vast majority of people. How do you explain that?

>>34943490
it's the opposite senpai, i created this video particulary for this thread. Check out my other vids, i don't care about views.

I've heard Zizek claim this elsewhere, it just seems like a talking point he developed that tricks people into believing he's very insightful because it's just crazy enough to make you ponder for a moment, but consider this...

The first games I played were just games I saw other people playing which captured my imagination. Commander Keen and Lemmings seen on a friend's computer - I never had any special inclination to become a teenager in space or to save lemmings, those were the parameters and narrative of a game designed by someone else. Same thing applies to more modern games like GTA - you're playing a story, or even if just doing your own thing - you're playing within parameters set by someone else and you're exploring those parameters - being able to kill someone is interesting and exciting in the game even if you'd never do this in reality. I cook chickens and pigs in Minecraft but I'm a vegan for example.

Also I remember playing that 2D GTA back in the late 90's and I thought running people over made me edgy, but I distinctly recall that I was trying to emulate what I THOUGHT was cool\masculine behaviour by being into that.

So this guy is full of shit.

>>34943555
it's a bit of an oversimplification, but why else is shit like call of duty so popular? men are fascinated by and drawn to violence, GENERALLY SPEAKING. yes, there are exceptions. happy now? men are also generally competitive by nature and are so drawn to games in general.

Zizeck is a fucking hack like his heroes Hegel and Lacan.
The art of continental philosophy (at least its shitty side, mad respect for Heideggar and Merleau-Ponty) is basically spouting vague aphorisms that seem true without ever bothing to test things empirically.

>>34942873
I doubt he knows too much about video games given that he's mostly been living in some commieblock for the last decades and doesn't really have his finger on the pulse of modern society

Either way, the point about what delusions really stand for is fairly solid. It's probably a mix of coping and real urges who may actually be acted out if not for the social restraints of society. Of course anxiety or the inability to let off stress in a healthy way are also contributors, as well as the state of mind being an outcast or browsing sites like 4chan puts you in after a while

>>34943747
How do you know that you are testing for what you think you are testing for?

>>34943690
What about Team Fortress or LoL?

Its not about violence, its about competition. You have to be a 50 year old mom to believe video games make you or are centered around just violence. Theyre centered around game play.

>>34943794
Those games are a 100% focused on hunting and killing.

>>34943772
Experimental design? Control groups? The concept of Falsifiability and using it to inform hypotheses?

Maybe I could be more specific if your question was aswell.

>>34943794
or perhaps i'm just not a bluepilled cuck that thinks violence is the devil. there is nothing wrong with violent media or games.

>>34943662
>- being able to kill someone is interesting and exciting in the game even if you'd never do this in reality.
You support his point senpai.

Also have you considered that there are certain universal aspects of mankind that get fed by most games and that thus appealed to you? What kind of games are you generally playing? That's where the insight comes from.

>>34943690
I think your last point regarding competition is more important than your war and violence-argument. European football for example is an extremely competetive team-sport in which violence is strictly sanctioned. Yet it attracts much more people than Call of Duty does. Competition and the desire to dominate can surely be seen as archetypal (though i'd argue that it is just as present in females, just differently, here more on a social level, related to status) but competition can express itself in various forms. And then there are various other psychic variables that influence what draws people to certain things, a desire to be as efficient as possible, to create and so on. Exactly the things that make people choose different vocations in real life, and different hobbies too, reflect themself in video games.

What i think is that Video Games are simply a very efficient outlet for the desire to dominate, to compete, and that thus a majority of games feed this.

>>34943747
>The art of continental philosophy (at least its shitty side, mad respect for Heideggar and Merleau-Ponty) is basically spouting vague aphorisms that seem true without ever bothing to test things empirically.

Do us a favour and actually read one of Zizek's serious books. It's complicated abstract theory, that goes beyond aphorisms. Filsm like The Pervert Guides or his pop-political/philosophical books are introductions. It's embarrassing to call Hegel and Lacan hacks by the way.

Also Continental philosophy, zizek too, make use of empirical evidence. They simply dare to go further than empiricists who only observe.

>>34942873
I once spent two days straight in Fable killing children to become the devil. What does this mean?

>>34943861
My question is very specific. Perhaps the confusion stems from using testing for to mean two different things.

How do you know that what you think you testing is affirming is an accurate description of what happened during your test.

>>34943747
Did Heidegger ever "tested things empirically"?

Also the whole continental philosophy vs analytic philosophy meme seems nothing but an invention of the british to keep being as snobbish as always

>>34943818
Portal, Mario, Eve Online, Myst.

>>34943861
Quantitative methods already fall apart in operationalization. Nothing is actually tested objectively, the results are conventional in nature and thus no understanding is really generated. It is hidden that in the act of operationalization all objectivity is erased. Where language intrudes, where human observation intrudes, all objectivity dies. So why not be real about it, and investigate language and the psychic phenomena that form ourselves, instead of observing them cautiously without the linguistic capability to dissect them?

>>34943917
That you are a curious person.

>>34943875
what if competition is just a proxy for war and violence? the conditions under which we evolved were bloody and violent, it would be ridiculous to think that just because the past 100 or so years have been relatively peaceful in the grand scheme of things that suddenly mankind no long has violence or war hardcoded into its genes

>>34943950
>portal, mario

They are still combat simulations. Eve Online is a combat simulation + a second life'ish chat-verse.

>>34943948
No but he analysed things logically instead of spouting aphorisms, even if his method is dense it doesnt rely on strange, often dubious historical assumptions.

>>34943875

>- being able to kill someone is interesting and exciting in the game even if you'd never do this in reality.

What I mean by this is that when for example with the early GTA that I mentioned, I realised the game allowed you to run people over and smoosh their blood along the road, I didn't enjoy this at all because it resembled reality or "killing", it was fun to see how the designers of the game had allowed the freedom to do this, and what they'd done graphically, I was reacting to the creativity of the way pixels were being displayed on a screen. If the game resembled reality very closely, I would certainly have been more shocked. At the same time I was playing this GTA, I saw my first "gore" videos like the Budd Dwyer suicide video and that make me react with horror and practically depression for weeks afterwards and affected me the rest of my life. Killing 'sprites' in a game barely even relates to killing a human.

>Also have you considered that there are certain universal aspects of mankind that get fed by most games and that thus appealed to you? What kind of games are you generally playing? That's where the insight comes from.

No, I mentioned playing games early on like Commander Keen and Lemmings - note that games back then were extremely limited in variety and in what you could do. 3D games were only just beginning with Mechwarrior and so on. So my choice was limited by availability, and availability was limited by the creativity of developers AND computer power, etc. I play practically anything that's out there.

>>34944014
...Super Mario Sunshine is a combat sim?
Portal at no point involves killing, or other humans in general. If youre going to argue for the sentry bots, just stop.

You seriously think the main component of Mario is combat and not platforming?

>>34943994
I didn't say that violence isn't hardcoded. I think that the desire to dominate precedes it though, that violence is and was the most efficient tool to ensure domination. The desire to dominate is inherent in evolution itself, irrelevant of whether the process is violent or not. After all the struggle for dominance is also apparent in the evolution of plants or non-violent living beings. It is inherent in existance itself.

This does not deny that violence is a primal and essential urge, that can be lived out in video games. I simply deny that it is the sole function of video games, or competition or sports.

>>34943989
>Nothing is actually tested objectively, the results are conventional in nature and thus no understanding is really generated.
All knowledge is conventional boyo, its a human contruct.
I dont have to be a correspondist to agree that scientific inquiry is the most valid type of inquiry, sinply because it is the only type that tries to prove itself wrong. We dont need necessary or a priori truths boy, the methods of induction and abduction have always been about probabilities, not certaintly.

Now go read some Peirce.

>>34944078
You jump on enemies to kill them, while avoiding dangers. It employs the basic principles of combat.

>Portal at no point involves killing

It doesn't have to be explicitedly about killing sentient beings. Portal wouldn't have been popular if it was just puzzles divorced from the fps.

>>34943989
>So why not be real about it, and investigate language and the psychic phenomena that form ourselves, instead of observing them cautiously without the linguistic capability to dissect them?
Why would I be opposed to this? Im only opposed to using strange historical assumptions and faulty methods of logical analysis (Hegelian synthesis).

>>34944167
So shooting holes in a wall is violence?
Also, jumping on things is hardly combat as we know it. Do you think taking someones peice in chess is combat? Or winning a hand of poker?

>>34944067
>Killing 'sprites' in a game barely even relates to killing a human.
Which is somewhat zizek's point. Since it is a game you can do it, without feeling the moral guilt and so on that devastated you for weeks. It does not feel like killing since the pretense of it being a game eliminates the consequences that make killing such a terrible act.

Despite of this it IS killing within the logic of the game. You accumulate "kills", you get orders to kill that or the other guy. It is never questioned within the internal logic of the game, that what you do is kill others, and it is often displayed in a very realistic way as to give the impression of "really" killing someone. If you say it barely relates you are right, since killing a human in real life is a vastly different thing. But to say you are killing sprites is a dishonest rationalization, and that people while playing do not adopt a detached stance in which they perceive to merely be killing sprites could be backed by thousand of videos showing authentic aggression or joy at succeedin in killing and so on (or being scared by horror games etc)

>>34944151
>I dont have to be a correspondist to agree that scientific inquiry is the most valid type of inquiry

You operate under the false assumption that only the currently conventional methods of empirical testing are scientific inquiries, while there are various forms and methods of generating knowledge. Psychoanalysis being one of them. By proclaiming that a particular method was the "scientific inquiry" you have exposed your ideological stance on the topic. A bit of historical knowledge in regards to the development of scientific methods would help you.

Now go read "Onedimensional Man"

>>34944267
What I am saying is that those games probably engage the same centers of the brain that are active during actual combat.

>>34944267
the whole time in portal you are struggling to survive in the face of the A.I.'s violence against you. at the end you get sweet, violent retribution against the A.I. in portal 2 you do it all over again, this time against a different A.I.

>>34943875
>It's embarrassing to call Hegel and Lacan hacks by the way.
Its embarassing to think that contradictions are allowable as long as they magically form a new concept.
Its embarassing to be the last stand of Platonism.
No comment on Lacan.

>>34944345
>Its embarassing to think that contradictions are allowable as long as they magically form a new concept.

Nice wikipedia-knowledge brainlet.

>>34943747
>mad respect for Heideggar and Merleau-Ponty

I like you. Question, are you a fan of Arendt? I'm curious how different people react to her given the obvious connection with Heideggar.

File: v2.png (90KB, 228x351px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 228x351px

>>34942873
You fucking mong, the rapist comment was just an example he threw out to illustrate his larger point. He could have just as easily talked about a brutal rapist IRL who plays a peaceful charisma-based character in a game

>>34944298
>You operate under the false assumption that only the currently conventional methods of empirical testing are scientific inquiries,
That is in no way a logical or rhetorical fall out of what I just said.

File: 1486258481570.png (113KB, 500x592px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 500x592px

>>34944409
played you like a damn fiddle

originalooo

>>34944373
Go ahead and enlighten me then.

>>34943769
He quotes morrowind in one of his books and in one of the videos i have seen he shows a very small selection of vidya he has

>>34944419
>I dont have to be a correspondist to agree that scientific inquiry is the most valid type of inquiry

Countering my critique of empiricist methods you claimed that scientific inquiry is the most valid type of inquiry, which implies that you equal empiricist methods with scientific inquiry, differentiating between the forms of inquiry, which implies that say an inquiry based on psychoanalytic method was such an inquiry, in opposition to "scientific inquiry".

>>34944409
>He could have just as easily talked about a brutal rapist IRL who plays a peaceful charisma-based character in a game

No, because then he wouldn't have made any sense. Society doesn't restrict you from not raping anyone.

>>34944298

Are you literally just bullshitting to get more replies to your post? Are you fucking Zizek himself???

>It does not feel like killing since the pretense of it being a game eliminates the consequences that make killing such a terrible act.

It does not feel like killing BECAUSE IT ISN'T KILLING. If someone tells me a history of Rome about 'x' killing 'y', does that mean I'm 'essentially' a killer for listening? No. Does it make me 'essentially' a killer because I found the persons' story about murder more interesting than his stories about "Women's daily lives in Ancient Rome"? No. If I am more interested in ONE particular killing over another, does that make me 'essentially' a killer? No. This is no different in the game.

I've already used the example of being vegan but cooking pigs and chickens in Minecraft. I do not WANT to eat those things, I became a vegan because I detest killing those things. I could at any moment go back to being non-vegan and this would cause no trouble for me technically, but at essence I don't want to!

When I enjoyed seeing Lemmings die, was this essential animal cruelty? What about killing creatures that don't even exist in reality?

>>34944445
Enlighten you in regards to what? Your statement was simply wrong, a retarded misinterpretation of Hegel's incredibly complex philosophy. What do you want to know? Or do you ask me to now explain you what Hegel's philosophy is actually about? That's a bit too much no? Read some secondary lit and then try tackling him himself. I had to work my ass off while studying as to get a satisfying grasp.

>>34944536
So Voldemort didn't actually kill Harry's parents in Harry Potter? Within the narrative logic of the game you are killing, and it is clearly stated as such. According to your argument a murder in a film wouldn't actually be a murder since he didn't actually kill anybody, which is interesting to think about, i wonder how one could then express the action that takes place on the screen. Since this will just rustle your jimmies further: Have you considered that there can be different kind of killings? One which is real, consequential, physical and however we want to call it. While one is virtual, imaginary, rendered? And that the latter one is different from the first one. Because otherwise you should really complain to all those devs which state that you are killing people in video games, when in truth you are... shooting sprites (But it isn't actually shooting, since if it were would you now be a gunshooter or a proficient sniper only because you "shot" "guns" in video games?)

>>34944501
Is psychoanalysis not scientific?
Legit question here. I agree that scientific and empirical are largely synonymous; so if psychoanalysis is empirical, what makes it not a science?

Keep in mind this is coming from someone who considers metaphysics and ethics to be sciences, and believes the disticntion between science and any type of philosophy is ultimately abritrary; physics is closer to metaphysics than it is to population ecology, theyre all just areas of inquiry.

Reminder that all 'knowledge' is based on axioms that themselves can't be test

>>34944544
Yeeeeeeeah i also know Hegel and the fact that he uses intractably vague processes like "sublimation" (why do we posit this as a phenomena again? Where do I see it, how does it cash out in inquiry?) to allow contradictions to be overcome is simply illogical. Hegel did not invent a new logic, he simply broke away from necessary logical rules to justify a spooky process of thought that doesnt actually happen in nature. Again, hes basically the last stand of Platonism.

>>34944704
Only if your fucking Descarte. Ever heard of coherence theory, or the pragamatic theory of knowledge?
To say all knowledge is axiomatic is silly. There are more modes of inquiry than deduction.

>>34944665
Psychoanalysis makes use of empirical evidence, but does not adhere to the conventional methods of empirical, quantitative methods. It is qualitative, which is often rendered as unscientific by critics. Acknowledging that true knowledge is impossible, and that as such the "knowledge" generated is valued by it's generation of rudimentary understanding and applicability, i do not see any argument as to why psychoanalysis is not scientific. Especially Lacanian psychoanalysis makes use of very sophisticated methods as to ensure the highest possible validity. Going back to the beginning, assuming that it's still you:
>The art of continental philosophy is basically spouting vague aphorisms that seem true without ever bothing to test things empirically.
Seeing this then, suggests a lack of knowledge of serious theoretical works of "continental philosophy", which seems bizarre when you then show respect for Heidegger.

Though i also entirely dismiss the notion that intuition or an aphoristic approach to philosophy is in any way less valuable than empirical methods. It is quite the opposite. I find in Montaigne, Pascal or Nietzsche insight that are not matched by what i call the little thoughts of empirical research. Of course i understand that different people think differently, but a complete dismisal seems to me motivated by some ideological stance, and that i dislike.

>>34944658

You didn't even attempt to address what I asked you. Please respond to my question re the person telling me about killings in ancient Rome. Answer my questions before we continue.

>>34944804
>Ever heard of coherence theory, or the pragamatic theory of knowledge?

Can you paraphrase them?

>>34944804
They still aren't solutions to the munchhausen trilemma, they just sidestep the problem without addressing it directly

you have to have an ounce of strength and be able to lift to rape

no gamers are actual biological males

they're weak, limp, skinny, fragile bonebags