False dichotomies and other fallacies RPGers use

[Jeff Wilder]

And for my second one - Gamers are smarter than other people (if this were true the previous fallacy wouldn't come up soo often)

RPGers are, IME, more intelligent on the average than the general population. (In fact, I'd say "significantly" more intelligent. Consider that the average American doesn't read for pleasure, before disputing the lesser statement.)

Regarding your parenthetical, the ability to recognize and avoid fallacy overlaps intelligence -- primarily via education in logic, but also via untaught reasoning ability -- but is not congruent to it. Your parenthetical is, interestingly, itself a fallacy.

RPGers have faults not so predominant in the general population, too, so don't think I'm mounting a rose-colored defense.

 

[ggroy]

And for my second one - Gamers are smarter than other people (if this were true the previous fallacy wouldn't come up soo often)

When one meets enough gamers over the years (or for that matter almost any other niche or fandom), one will probably be dispelled of the notion that gamers are smarter than other people.

 

[ggroy]

RPGers are, IME, more intelligent on the average than the general population. (In fact, I'd say "significantly" more intelligent. Consider that the average American doesn't read for pleasure, before disputing the lesser statement.)

Does reading for pleasure have a significant correlation with intelligence?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I leave it to using reason to decide. Yes, it's a subjective term. But it is a word and it has meaning. If someone is intentionally obtuse and argues that (for example) the ghost of Gary Gygax DMing his game has the same degree of difference from my play experience as rolling dice in a slightly different location than I do, well, there's not much I can do about that.

Well, "the ghost of Gary Gygax DMing" and "rolling dice in a slightly different location" are similar in that they are both extreme examples. Usually, the question as to whether or not something is "minute" is far more subjective than either.

There is always a degree of subjectivity in words, but if you argue that all words are completely subjective then how will you ever have a conversation with someone?

I don't argue that all words are completely subjective. I argue that valuation is subjective. Earlier in this thread, I even posited that valuation may not be completely subjective.

The "it means what I say it means" fallacy: using words in ways which depart from the standard meanings of the words, without explanation of this difference.

I call this "Humpty-Dumpty Logic" after the bit in Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There.

`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master -- that's all.'

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. `They've a temper, some of them -- particularly verbs: they're the proudest -- adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs -- however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'

`Would you tell me please,' said Alice, `what that means?'

`Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. `I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'​

Sorry everyone, for letting him drag me into this again. I'm out.

Impenetrability! That's what I say!

Ah. Obviously the first post in this was mine, while posting under your user name. Mea culpa.

"Deliberately" need not be an element.

All too true.


RC

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Does reading for pleasure have a significant correlation with intelligence?

Yes. (That's an excellent and intelligent question. Tell me, do you play RPGs?)

 

[ggroy]

Yes. (That's an excellent and intelligent question. Tell me, do you play RPGs?)

Yes to the latter. Though presently I'm not in any regular game. (My 4E campaign ended awhile ago).

For the original question, is there a published study which has examined this question?

 

[Jeff Wilder]

For the original question, is there a published study which has examined this question?

There have been several. Have you tried Google?

 

[pawsplay]

Does reading for pleasure have a significant correlation with intelligence?

Some people are not intelligent enough to read well. Compared with "people in general," which includes people who do not read, people who read for pleasure are significantly more intelligent. Intelligence is also associated with interest in things in general, so simply having an interest which requires thought, however minimal in intensity, tends to mean people who do that thing are more intelligent than average.

It's like asking if people who play tennis are more physically fit than usual. Of course they are. Even though some people who play tennis are in rather poor shape, they are at least in shape enough to play tennis.

People who think gamers are dumb do not spend enough time in on-level high school classes, eavesdropping on conversations at the DMV, or listening to "man on the street" interviews about major political issues. The vast majority of gamers know the difference between Austria and Australia; there is a significant slice of the US population that doesn't.

 

[ggroy]

There have been several.

Do you have a reference in mind? (ie. journal citation, web links, etc ...).

Have you tried Google?

I'm interested in which particular references you had in mind.

 

[Diamond Cross]

The attitude of "I know more rules and/or fluff about the game so I am more correct than you and I care more about the game that you" and "once something's been established it should never be changed under any circumstances and any change thereafter is invalid".