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: 8158995" data-attributes="member: 5142">If you want to make such sort of "not cool" insinuations, then one could thereby insinuate from the above statement that you make an appeal to logic so you can sidestep actual evidence or experience and attempt to wrestle authority that way. In the case of discussing the play of games, then it seems that firsthand experience of playing said games would be relevant.One would hope, for example, that someone reviewing a video game has experience playing it, and that the opinion of someone who has played the video game would be more relevant and meaningful for discussing what gameplay is like than a smooth-talker with a half-baked opinion who hasn't.Honestly? Yes, though I personally doubt you would have the exact same opinions. That rudimentary knowledge would at least give you better grounding and foundation for your argument than not. Imagine if the situation was reversed. Would you be appealing to "whoever makes the most logical argument," if you knew that your opposition had no actual experience running/playing D&D? I have difficulties imagining that this would be the case. The lack of experience would likely be your main point of criticism. How could they know how play operates for either GM agency or player agency in D&D if they didn't have any experience with the game under their belt? It would likely seem absurd to you, like a baseless argument.Consider, for example in this very thread, how [USER=7016699]@prabe[/USER] has stated that they played Fate for a year and they found the game not to their liking, which is perfectly fine. But shared first-hand knowledge of gameplay in Fate means that having a good faith conversation with prabe about Fate does not require arguing too many basic points about how the game works, and they can point to particular issues that they experienced. [USER=6779310]@aramis erak[/USER] likewise has firsthand experience with Fate. If we discussed it, we may not agree on everything, but we likely could respect the fact that we both have experience running/playing Fate, and we would know that our opinions are informed by said experiences.My goal is not to attack any inconsistency on your part, but, rather, to raise the point that I believe you underestimate the importance that your personal game experience factors into what you deem as "logical analysis" and how analysis at odds with actual experience often falls flat.But somehow it's cool to insinuate that your opponents in this discussion are just appealing to firsthand experience so they can gain for authority over the topic?Look, my point is not to insinuate bad faith on your part. My point here is that logic without evidence or experience regarding these games results in logic detached from reality, and this can be a dark area IME for bad faith arguments. Logic is not somehow the end all be all "good" of internet discussion that some people fetishize it as. I don't think that humans are fully rational. Much like Hume, I increasingly think that humans are ultimately biological creatures guided by their passions who use logic as window-dressing. But an important step for discussion often involves recognizing that our logic is not somehow impervious to the influence of our passions, experiences, and biases. Experience plays an important role for almost all discussions in these threads.</blockquote>

Verification