D&D 4E I'm really concerned about 4E

[Nifft]

We tend to accept that there are "a slew of external emotional indicators", but unless you can objectively determine the emotions of a subject, you cannot objectively correlate the indicators to the emotion.

From a subjective standpoint, you may believe that these "indicators" indicate the emotions/thoughts you think they do, but you cannot actually know.

It's true that people are terrible at introspection, but that doesn't mean we should throw it out entirely.

Particularly when we can correlate it with involuntary, easily observed behaviors.

But if you think introspection is utterly useless, discard it -- B.F. Skinner can accommodate you and still allow some useful observations.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Raven Crowking]

It's true that people are terrible at introspection, but that doesn't mean we should throw it out entirely.

Particularly when we can correlate it with involuntary, easily observed behaviors.

But if you think introspection is utterly useless, discard it -- B.F. Skinner can accommodate you and still allow some useful observations.

No. I simply don't make the mistake of imagining my introspection to be objective.

 

[Nifft]

No. I simply don't make the mistake of imagining my introspection to be objective.

You instead make the mistake of imagining that "not objective" == useless?

If not, what's your point?

Cheers, -- N

 

[Raven Crowking]

You instead make the mistake of imagining that "not objective" == useless?

If not, what's your point?

My point is that the statement is non-evidenciary. You cannot say that it proves anything, or disproves anything.

Subjective explaination may be useful, necessary even, but its usefulness sharply declines when one mistakes subjectivity for objective fact.

RC

 

[Nifft]

My point is that the statement is non-evidenciary.

Big words like this are not your friends. Evidence is exactly what the external indicators are.

You cannot say that it proves anything, or disproves anything.

Subjective explaination may be useful, necessary even, but its usefulness sharply declines when one mistakes subjectivity for objective fact.

I get the feeling "objective fact" is a higher standard than any argument could ever meet.

Oh well, this is off topic.

Ciao, -- N

 

[Cadfan]

I demolished this thread without even meaning to!

My kung fu is strong.

 

[Odhanan]

I demolished this thread without even meaning to!

My kung fu is strong.

Nah, you did not destroy it! Threads take a life of their own, this is their nature!

Fly, thread, fly away!

Seriously, it's cool to see the conversation progress in unexpected directions. Once again, I'd just like to point out that my concern about 4E doesn't have anything to do with how the rules change, don't change, or how the books will look like, actually. That's the marketing, the PR, the digital initiative, Gleemax, e-Dragon and e-Dungeon, that truly worry me. Everything that would make up the "D&D culture" we discuss on these boards every day. So far, all of that does not remotely appeal to me, and as a result, I'm afraid I'll disconnect myself from the D&D culture, since I would not invest in anything that does not remotely attract me as a customer.

 

[Lackhand]

Don't you go nowhere, EN World, 'kay?

Please? You're all the D&D culture I really need, and I'd miss you.

 

[Shortman McLeod]

How about a scientist telling you he can tell what you think or feel by measuring and recording your neuron activity?

What if the scientist happens to look like a hippie to you?
What if the scientist calls your neuron activity your aura?
What if you don't believe neuron activity can be measured or recorded?

I'm going to concentrate really, really, really hard and try to understand why this post (and this whole hippie aura/scientist neuron thing) is anything other than a pointless digression.

I need to concentrate on this for awhile, mind you. I'll get back to you.

 

[KingCrab]

I figured it was nuts, too.


...Until I read this: http://p222.ezboard.com/fokayyourturnfrm40.showMessage?topicID=17.topic

Woah. Paying for random packs of virtual figures wasn't something I had even suspected. Imagine you pay to get a bunch of online images you already have. Somehow that seems much worse than buying actual items you already have.