Personalities in the Gaming Industry and Politics

[EricNoah]

Folks, let's do our best to avoid discussing political particulars. Let's not drag parties into this if we can avoid it. It'll help the Titanic avoid icebergs.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Those two appeals work far beyond America's borders. They're damn near universal, as our friends in France or the Netherlands could well testify.

You're right. There was no need for my inclusion of the phrase "in the United States." My point has nothing to do with comparison of uneducated voters internationally, but rather with explaining the "swing vote."

 

[nothing to see here]

Interesting, so you think that they should have voted for the EU. I can admit that I dont know what the afore mentioned constitution looked like so I cannot say either way.

Have you studied it? Do you think they hurt themselves by voting no?

A discussion I would love to have! Just not on these boards. My point was more about the appeals used by the winning campaigns...which matched up to Jeff Wilders two examples very nicely.

 

[EricNoah]

Maybe so. But doesn't that still mean that the less well-educated are forming and expressing their opinions without finding or formulating such "facts/data/statistics/evidence"?

My devil's advocate position is:

There is no superiority in finding and using only the facts that support your position, vs. not having any facts to back up your position.

Furthermore, my hypothesis is that people make up their minds first, then find facts (if necessary) later, to reinforce their world view.

Now... should a person decide that they ARE going to try to engage "all" the facts/evidence they can find, and allow their mind to be changed if necessary ... is the more educated person going to be better equipped?

 

[Belen]

Those two appeals work far beyond America's borders. They're damn near universal, as our friends in France or the Netherlands could well testify.

Remember, this is the first time they were allowed to vote on any aspect of the EU. For instance, the German government voted to ratify the EU constitution without a referendum, so the people of Germany did not get to vote on how they felt about the 400+ page document.

But enough of this for now. If you want to talk more then send me a PM.

 

[Erik Mona]

For instance, some folks have refused to read anything by China Mieville because he's somewhere to the left of Trotsky and to an extent it carries over to some of his fiction.

And these people are missing some of the best fantasy fiction written in the last 25 years. Their loss, not China's.

To speak specifically to your post about the Whig party, I think I understand your concern, and I can say with authority that a person's politics does not enter into my business decisions in terms of what goes into the magazine. Not only would that be grossly unethical, but it wouldn't be good for the magazine.

As I understand it, Gary Gygax himself is something of a strict libertarian, and I would publish him in an instant because I like his writing and because it would be good for the magazine.

All of us are political animals, in one way or another. I'd like to think that the one thing we do share is a love of D&D, and that should bring us together, not split us apart.

--Erik Mona
http://www.superunicorn.com/erik

 

[John Morrow]

For example, take progressive taxation. Understanding progressive taxation as it affects me is simple. Understanding progressive taxation as it affects people like me is only slightly harder. But there can be no real objective understanding of progressive taxation without understanding concepts like, but not limited to, what John Rawls' called "the veil of ignorance."

Fundamentally, people support or oppose ideas like progressive taxation (and decide exactly how progressive they think taxes should be) on the basis of what they think is "fair" and how they believe human nature works, even when they fully understand the issues involved. In fact, there are two quite valid definitions of fair that roughly correspond to the two main political camps -- equality of opportunity and equality of results.

The fact that there are highly educated people with a broad variety of political opinions and opinions on things like progressive taxation should suggest that either there isn't just one right answer or that there is more to their disagreement than simply knowing the facts.

It has become fashionable to claim that all opinions merit equal respect, but it is simply not true. The opinion that is grounded in objectivity and logic is superior to one that is grounded in emotion and subjectivity, at least insofar as the consequences of the opinion in question, as social policy, affects others, like him and unlike him.

While I agree that all opinions don't merit equal respect, there are plenty of examples where the consquences of attempting to make decisions based on objectivity and logic are no superior in practice. Why? Because people rarely if ever have enough information to make a decision that's wholly objective and not based on any assumptions. Economist Thomas Sowell talks about this in some detail in his books The Quest for Cosmic Justice and A Conflict of Visions.

By the way, if you haven't read them when I posted them earlier in this thread, you should probably read these two articles, too:

http://www.hss.caltech.edu/~camerer/web_material/latimes050204.htm
http://www.csbmb.princeton.edu/~jdgreene/

 

[wingsandsword]

LOL, you know if I was religious I might actually be offended that you just grouped my faith in with that cesspool known as scientology by calling it a religion. ;-)

Hey, I was being polite and diplomatic. If I want to be honest, just go to www.xenu.net and read around.

Gamers are a diverse lot. The ones I've always seen have tended to be an open-minded, relatively intelligent bunch who are capiable of seeing other points of view. They've seen (or at least simulated) a variety of ideologies (alignments), cultures, and governmental systems.

Although I am greatly saddened by the extreme political polarization that the US has taken over the last 5 or so years. The nation is politically divided into two halves of roughly equal size and approximately opposite ideology. In the past, you had a small extreme faction on both sides, and a large moderate middle that supported both ends to some extreme. Now we've become factionalized and splintered. Personally, I think it is intentional manipulation of the media and the electorate to appeal to the extreme ends of the spectrum, and use elements of fear to cow many of the moderates into supporting a radical agenda that is far beyond their own beliefs. "Red State" and "Blue State" just serve to keep us split apart, and this nation isn't going to get any better until we learn to look beyond simplistic "us and them" divisions, or at least chill out and realize that a lot of "hot button" issues are really quite petty and small-time compared to bigger questions of the economy, environment and foriegn relations, but it's easier to create a moral panic and cast blame on a percieved enemy as the source of all problems than to fix difficult issues like the budget, trade policy, or environmental policy.

Approaching 200 posts and still civil and polite. Don't want to jinx it, but things like this really do give me hope (Just as reading political flamewars on Fark deplete hope).

 

[Belen]

Now... should a person decide that they ARE going to try to engage "all" the facts/evidence they can find, and allow their mind to be changed if necessary ... is the more educated person going to be better equipped?

My answer would be no. Degrees are not a real sign of education. Someone can get through college without ever educating themselves, whereas another may never have been able to afford an education but made real use of their library card.

But using degree to measure education is not a real sign of someone's knowledge. A dumb person can pay their way through college.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Now... should a person decide that they ARE going to try to engage "all" the facts/evidence they can find, and allow their mind to be changed if necessary ... is the more educated person going to be better equipped?

Of course, even if only because a better educated person will be better at the research.