Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8158828" data-attributes="member: 5142">The problem is that most discursive logic is not necessarily about "better logic" or what actually is the "most logical" as a lot of our sense of logic is also informed and guided by our own biases, preconceptions, and past experiences. This is to say, you likely find the people who tend to be most convincing and logical likely also are supporting your own preconceived notions and viewpoints. This is how appeals to "logic" can be quite (unintentionally) self-deceptive. This is also why people also appeal to possessing the additional perspective of firsthand experience with playing/running game systems, because logic on its own doesn't cut it. This assertion is also at odds with a number of your own points in this debate about how you claimed that certain arguments people made were not consistent with your own experiences playing your game (system/style/mode) of choice. It's also why even if you believe someone provides "the most logical analysis" but others who have firsthand knowledge of the various respective game systems don't find it persuasive at all. This is pretty telling about the importance of actual experience, knowledge, and familiarity for these "logical" analyses of games. Logic on its own without experience or evidence, particularly for discussions involving the cultivated experience of game systems and mechanics seems mostly detached from reality, likely for the self-serving purposes of reinforcing preconceptions and biases or to "win" debates rather than to come to an actual good faith understanding.</blockquote>

Verification