A bit tired of people knocking videogames...

[Raven Crowking]

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

If those associations are impairing your ability to function, yes. And, even then, they are only "wrong" within context. The same associations, if they do not impair someone else, are not "wrong".

Personally, I don't believe in rational motives. Rationality helps us to fulfill our motives/desires, and it may help us examine them (esp. useful when trying to decide what is most important to you!) but it does not generate them.

You are obviously free to believe otherwise. But even saying "If I don't X, I'll die, so I am logically motivated to X" presupposes that not dying has a rational, rather than an emotive, valuation. And the very idea of a "rational valuation" implies that valuation can be objective rather than subjective.

Follow motivations far enough and, IMHO and IME, they are always emotive in nature.

Follow rationality and logic far enough, and you always discover the worm of uncertainty is gnawing on the heart of any conclusion. Or, at least, I have always found it so, and the nature of thought and/or logic seems to mandate that it always be so.


RC

 

[Umbran]

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

Have you ever seen someone come to a snap decision without facts at hand?

Have you ever seen that person then defend that decision as correct, in spite of any facts that may be displayed to them?

Then you've seen it in action.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

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

I'll give you a personal example- there are certain songs and smells that I associate with each other...not that I've ever experienced them together. Completely irrational, but I can't shake it.

 

[Umbran]

You are obviously free to believe otherwise. But even saying "If I don't X, I'll die, so I am logically motivated to X" presupposes that not dying has a rational, rather than an emotive, valuation. And the very idea of a "rational valuation" implies that valuation can be objective rather than subjective.

Now we'll see definitions in action. RC, I'm using us as an example. I hope you don't mind...

RC here seems to conflate "rational" with "mathematically logical". I am not of the opinion that they are the same. I hold there is a difference between pure logic and rationality, a difference between being logical, and being reasonable, lucid, in control of one's faculties.

This simple difference has, in the past, had us butting heads. But, I now accept that he does not usually make the distinction I do, so I don't jump on him like a trampoline when he says things like this.

 

[Fifth Element]

* BTW, WTF does "gamist" mean anyway?

Good question. I'm sure whoever uses the term knows what they mean by it, even if you don't and are thusly confused by the word.

 

[Fifth Element]

RC here seems to conflate "rational" with "mathematically logical". I am not of the opinion that they are the same. I hold there is a difference between pure logic and rationality, a difference between being logical, and being reasonable, lucid, in control of one's faculties.

Indeed, when you're discussing something as intrinsically subjective as one's tastes in games, you'll never be able to apply pure mathematical logic. But you can still be rational about it, in the sense that you mean it.

 

[jmucchiello]

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.

Possible? Certainly. Education is always possible. Likely? Nope. Likely before D&D 5e comes out and is "too videogamey"? Or perhaps it will "Too CCGy" or "Too boardgamey"? Winter Olympics to be held in Hell is more likely.

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

<sigh>

n other words I'm something of a realist.

What?

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.

And you can't fix that. You can't fix human natu-- Didn't I say this already?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Good question. I'm sure whoever uses the term knows what they mean by it, even if you don't and are thusly confused by the word.

Which is why I asked.

 

[Fifth Element]

Which is why I asked.

I don't generally use the term myself, though I've certainly heard many others use it. And also seen many lively disagreements about what it means.

 

[Diamond Cross]

And you can't fix that. You can't fix human natu-- Didn't I say this already?

But you can manipulate it. This happens all the time in real life.

People, generally speaking, are lemmings and herding animals all rolled into one. With a few exceptional people that crop up occasionally.

If you haven't, I'd suggests reading some Plato, especially his Allegory Of The Cave in his work "The Republic".

The Republic | filepedia.org