A bit tired of people knocking videogames...

[Dannyalcatraz]

But the thing is, this isn't really tied to videogames at all.

Sure it is- for that person. Otherwise they wouldn't have said it.

(But, for the record, there was other stuff in that spoiler tag I agreed with.)

In the end, the problem is that simply dismissing something as "videogamey" reads as "This is bad because it is like video games, thus implying that video games are themselves intrinsically bad." That's pretty much never what someone actually means, though.

Again- you know, we could use a "blue in the face" smiley"- you're making an inference that is not actually being implied by the speaker.

"Element X in 4Ed is videogamey, so I don't like it in my TTRPG" is not inherently a knock on videogames, it is an assertion that because X is like a videogame to that person, they don't want it in their TTRPG. It says NOTHING about how they feel about videogames.

For example, "Your soup is too garlicky" does not imply that the speaker does not like garlic, just that the taste of garlic in that dish is too strong or is at odds with other flavors in the soup.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Again- you know, we could use a "blue in the face" smiley"- you're making an inference that is not actually being implied by the speaker.

We all have a reader bias, though, that causes us to think "If I had written this, it would mean X." It can sometimes be difficult to realize that the interpretation is inherent not in the speaker, but in the reader.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

[MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION]: Hey, thanks for that last XP. We could have the "normal man" discussion again, and you would win by pointing out that I'm now a superhero!

 

[Diamond Cross]

You are capable of fixing human nature? I can't top that. I'm done.

Well, that's not entirely what I meant.

I meant it's entirely possible to train people to not be so vague and be more precise with their usage of language.

And I mean this as a general statement and am not addressing any particular head butting in this thread.

However, I do like to think of myself as God, at least from time to time.

Because I can easily infuriate people. You see, most people want to believe in how things should be, not how they are. Such as most people want to believe in two plus two equals seven. I tell them, no it doesn't, it equals four. And smoke comes out of their ears when I say stuff like that.

Because it's like what the Joker says in Dark Knight. Things have to go according to plan or people go all wonky.

In other words I'm something of a realist.

And people just don't like to be real.

They'll believe what they want to believe and no matter how much evidence is showing them to be wrong, they will never change their minds and I personally believe many people are simply incapable of changing it when they've made up their minds.

 

[Diamond Cross]

double post

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

We all have a reader bias, though, that causes us to think "If I had written this, it would mean X." It can sometimes be difficult to realize that the interpretation is inherent not in the speaker, but in the reader.


RC

I run into it all the time, professionally and socially.

 

[Umbran]

In the end, the problem is that simply dismissing something as "videogamey" reads as "This is bad because it is like video games, thus implying that video games are themselves intrinsically bad." That's pretty much never what someone actually means, though.

Agreed. If I took a bite from a chocolate chip cookie, made a face, and discarded the cookie, saying that it was nasty because it was too garlicky*, that wouldn't necessarily be a dig against garlic. Nor does it say that I don't like garlic, in general. It just says that I don't like it in my chocolate chip cookies, that I don't think it is an appropriate mix of flavors.

Now, you may wish to find out what about garlic I find objectionable in chocolate chip cookies. And maybe I'd be able to articulate why in a way that you understand, or maybe not. I may not ever have discussed the nuances of garlic in such detail as to have the words. Or, maybe we don't have the shared vocabulary about flavors.

We could then go into etiquette: When is it appropriate for you to tell me I am wrong about garlicky taste in my cookies? How many times can I step into discussions about a particular brand to denounce their garlicky flavor before I am being boorish?

In the end, we do not share the same tongue**, so we may have to agree to disagree that there is a garlicky flavor in a given cookie.


* And nobody better tell me this is an absurd analogy, for I have been fed garlic-laced chocolate chip cookies before, and they were, in fact, nasty.

** Thank goodness!!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

They'll believe what they want to believe and no matter how much evidence is showing them to be wrong, they will never change their minds and I personally believe many people are simply incapable of changing it when they've made up their minds.

There is a VAST psychological difference between your mind making an association between two things and how the mind deals with facts.

The former can be partially or even entirely irrational, and thus, beyond the capacity of mere discourse to erase. (At least, not without some fancy-schmancy techniques you learn as a mental-health care professional.)

 

[Aberzanzorax]

Now, you may wish to find out what about garlic I find objectionable in chocolate chip cookies. And maybe I'd be able to articulate why in a way that you understand, or maybe not. I may not ever have discussed the nuances of garlic in such detail as to have the words. Or, maybe we don't have the shared vocabulary about flavors.

An excellent point. In many ways this thread is attempting to do just this.


I might say "garlic is too spicy and savory for the sweetness of chocolate cookies."

Someone else could say "but you liked that jalapeno basted roasted pineapple!" or even "try this chocolate chip cookie with some spicy and savory chipotle flavor". (I've had this, actually, and it was pretty good).

I might then try again to describe the very specific components of garlic and the mix with chocolate and such and so on, but after about 20 pages of attempting to do so, I might realize that, for whatever reason, I'm unable to explain it in a way that others can understand.

That doesn't mean I suddenly like garlicky chocolate chip cookies though, nor does it mean that the garlicky-ness is not what is making them taste bad to me.

 

[Diamond Cross]

There is a VAST psychological difference between your mind making an association between two things and how the mind deals with facts.

How so? I haven't really seen that difference and this is the first time I've ever heard that there is a difference.

The former can be partially or even entirely irrational, and thus, beyond the capacity of mere discourse to erase. (At least, not without some fancy-schmancy techniques you learn as a mental-health care professional.)

Actually they both can be very irrational.

There is such a thing as being mixed up and having the wrong associations.