|
On June 01 2011 08:41 allandee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 07:56 Doodsmack wrote:
His direct implication was that the word nigger necessarily refers to black people of the 50s and 60s and carries no weight today. Thus black people in our "day of prosperity" (Destiny's words) who have money shouldn't be offended at all by the word nigger. Prosperity was Destiny's word, money wasn't mentioned.
...He referred to black people with $600 coats (or maybe it was jewerly or something) and $200 shoes. I interpreted that to mean black people with money.
|
On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:
Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context,
is offensive to those who are raped,
Exactly, I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape is an example of a usage of the word that very explicitly describes what the word means. It is quite literally insane to be offended by that.
You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
Genocide is poorly defined. How's that for an argument? 
3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization.
One man's terrorist, another's freedom fighter.
|
On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this: Show nested quote +
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this: Show nested quote +
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this: Show nested quote +
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further.
I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense.
Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word.
The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups.
|
On June 01 2011 09:05 allandee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:
Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context,
is offensive to those who are raped,
Exactly, I http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape is an example of a usage of the word that very explicitly describes what the word means. It is quite literally insane to be offended by that. Show nested quote +
You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
Genocide is poorly defined. How's that for an argument? Show nested quote +
3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization.
One man's terrorist, another's freedom fighter.
Genocide isn't poorly defined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide
"the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group"
3. You're agreeing with contextualist arguments here.
|
On June 01 2011 09:00 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 08:41 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 07:56 Doodsmack wrote:
His direct implication was that the word nigger necessarily refers to black people of the 50s and 60s and carries no weight today. Thus black people in our "day of prosperity" (Destiny's words) who have money shouldn't be offended at all by the word nigger. Prosperity was Destiny's word, money wasn't mentioned. ...He referred to black people with $600 coats (or maybe it was jewerly or something) and $200 shoes.
I forgot that, you're right, money was mentioned.
I interpreted that to mean black people with money.
No shit.
Yes, I completely forgot that part of the exchange, and maybe I overlooked it because I'm oblivious to how money has anything to do with it. (And so I took it as a random joke, and discarded the idea.)
But still, I can't understand how the use of the word is generally offensive anymore. It is without power, except for what little a slew of, predominantly white, indignant people give it.
Distasteful maybe, like Ronald McDonald, but kind of funny.
|
On June 01 2011 09:10 ArgosDelta wrote:Genocide isn't poorly defined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide"the deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group"
And the second part of that very sentence, on Wikipedia:
",[1] though what constitutes enough of a "part" to qualify as genocide has been subject to much debate by legal scholars.[2]
3. You're agreeing with contextualist arguments here.
I am indeed! Very much so.
|
On June 01 2011 09:08 ArgosDelta wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further. I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense. Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word. The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups.
I don't get it. If my argument claiming that StarCraft is nothing like genocide works in favor of your overall argument, then why are you working so hard to disprove it? In other words, why are you arguing against yourself?
I'll admit that I'm extremely confused by the stance you've taken. You tell me that disproving the StarCraft-genocide analogy will support your stance, and yet you insist that the analogy is true. Huh?
|
On June 01 2011 09:34 allandee wrote:And the second part of that very sentence, on Wikipedia: ",[1] though what constitutes enough of a "part" to qualify as genocide has been subject to much debate by legal scholars.[2]
Just to clarify, I think the miniscule variations in habits and appearance within our race are poor reasons for cliquing up and bullying eachother. Genocide or no.
|
On June 01 2011 09:40 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 09:08 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further. I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense. Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word. The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups. I don't get it. If my argument claiming that StarCraft is nothing like genocide works in favor of your overall argument, then why are you working so hard to disprove it? In other words, why are you arguing against yourself? I'll admit that I'm extremely confused by the stance you've taken. You tell me that disproving the StarCraft-genocide analogy will support your stance, and yet you insist that the analogy is true. Huh?
Ok let me simplify this for you
If starcraft=/=genocide
then destiny's use of rape=/= the act of rape
I was using the logic of the argument you presented to show you it doesn't work but you don't seem to understand.
|
On June 01 2011 09:34 allandee wrote:And the second part of that very sentence, on Wikipedia: ",[1] though what constitutes enough of a "part" to qualify as genocide has been subject to much debate by legal scholars.[2] I am indeed! Very much so.
I don't think it's really debatable that in starcraft enough people are being killed to constitute a "part". Considering around 400 people die in the course of 1 hour of starcraft it can add up pretty quickly, not even counting the campaign.
And I think the UN definition of genocide has legitimacy.....to deny the legitimacy of the UN seems odd.
"...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
|
On June 01 2011 09:48 ArgosDelta wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 09:40 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 09:08 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further. I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense. Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word. The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups. I don't get it. If my argument claiming that StarCraft is nothing like genocide works in favor of your overall argument, then why are you working so hard to disprove it? In other words, why are you arguing against yourself? I'll admit that I'm extremely confused by the stance you've taken. You tell me that disproving the StarCraft-genocide analogy will support your stance, and yet you insist that the analogy is true. Huh? Ok let me simplify this for you If starcraft=/=genocide then destiny's use of rape=/= the act of rape I was using the logic of the argument you presented to show you it doesn't work but you don't seem to understand.
No, I got that part just fine. What I don't understand is why you're claiming that Starcraft = genocide. Why are you contradicting your own argument?
|
On June 01 2011 09:58 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 09:48 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 09:40 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 09:08 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further. I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense. Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word. The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups. I don't get it. If my argument claiming that StarCraft is nothing like genocide works in favor of your overall argument, then why are you working so hard to disprove it? In other words, why are you arguing against yourself? I'll admit that I'm extremely confused by the stance you've taken. You tell me that disproving the StarCraft-genocide analogy will support your stance, and yet you insist that the analogy is true. Huh? Ok let me simplify this for you If starcraft=/=genocide then destiny's use of rape=/= the act of rape I was using the logic of the argument you presented to show you it doesn't work but you don't seem to understand. No, I got that part just fine. What I don't understand is why you're claiming that Starcraft = genocide. Why are you contradicting your own argument?
*sigh*
It's the equivalent of the saying rape=meaning rape argument presented by those opposed to steven's arguments.
Steven is using a word out of it's normal context in a different setting.
We are simulating an act out of it's normal context in a different setting.
If we take it to be true that saying rape clearly implies the actual act of rape, then we must also take it to be true that simulating genocide implies the actual act of genocide. This however is something that everyone here clearly can't argue because they do it every day. So what does this mean? That the original premise that saying rape implies the actual act of rape must be untrue.
I was using my opponents argument, and applying it to show it's not valid or sound.
Do you understand? I was using my opponent's argument, applying it to murder, and proving that it doesn't work consideirng that we don't try to mitigate offenses to war veterans, families of dead due to violence, refugees, etc.
starcraft is clearly not genocide, and thats why saying rape clearly doesn't imply rape.
|
On June 01 2011 10:04 ArgosDelta wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 09:58 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 09:48 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 09:40 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 09:08 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:54 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:20 ArgosDelta wrote:On June 01 2011 08:08 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 08:05 allandee wrote:On June 01 2011 06:57 wzzit wrote:
I can't understand your point because you've walked back on it. First, you ridiculed people who get offended by rape jokes by pointing out that we're playing a "genocide simulator." But then you conceded that the comparison between Starcraft and genocide is deeply offensive. So why bring it up in the first place? I followed the thread back a few pages, and found that someone was arguing that the act of * making jokes about rape is not comparable to the act of * forcing sexual intercourse or encouraging the latter. Yeah, but I don't think that was this guy's original point. He argued that nobody has the right to be offended by rape jokes because we're all playing murder/genocide simulators. Thus, nobody in this forum has the right to claim any kind of moral high ground. Like other posters, I pointed out the absurdity of this comparison - Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide - so this guy conceded the point but is still telling me that my logic sucks. What? Did it never occur to you I was applying the logic used by the people who wish to censor streams? Using the logic that using a word like rape, even in context, is offensive to those who are raped, we must then look at how simulating murder and genocide, even in context, is offensive to those with murdered family members, dead children from violence, veterans who lost best friends in warfare, and refugees from war-torn nations. Obviously, though, we are not worried about this. Why is that do you suppose? It is because of the context. You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons. 1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer. 2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.) 3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization. Okay, so first you say this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you say this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
And now you're saying this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
So first, you claimed that Starcraft simulates genocide. Then, you concede that comparing Starcraft to ACTUAL genocide is highly offensive and inappropriate. Now, you're comparing Starcraft to genocide again. You contradict yourself so many times that it's getting pretty damn hard to figure out where you actually stand. With regard to the rest of your post: your logic fails because your comparison between StarCraft and actual instances of genocide is ridiculous. Claiming that people who play a game that has little to no resemblance to reality are somehow implicitly endorsing genocide is a fantastically absurd argument. The 3 races that are "systematically murdering each other" are giant bugs, aliens with psionic powers, and space marines. The people who have actually suffered from genocide in real life - Jews, Armenians, Bosnian Muslims, Rwandans, etc. - do not in any way resemble StarCraft's three races. Honestly, the races in The Lord of the Rings are more realistic than the species in StarCraft. I'm going to stop here. I've wasted enough time on this argument. If you honestly think that StarCraft is comparable to genocide, then you have no comprehension of the magnitude of that word, and there's no point discussing things further. I think you're confused. When i take the logic of the statement "using rape, in any context, is inappropriate." and apply it to genocide, it becomes "simulating genocide, in any context, is inappropriate." I was using the logic of the argument presented AGAINST steven and following through it to prove it is illogical. This is the basics of philosophical argument. Take premises to be true and see if the following argument makes sense. Your own argument works in my favor here. If it is ridiculous to claim the fantastical genocide in starcraft is in no way comparable to real genocide, even if it is the same act, then it is also ridiculous to compare the fantastical use of rape by steven to real life acts of rape, even if it the same word. The three species may be different but how is that relevant? Are not Turks different from Armenians? Are not Germans different from Jews? Does this justify either genocide? You cannot simply put arbitrary definitions for the systematic slaughter of specific racial groups. I don't get it. If my argument claiming that StarCraft is nothing like genocide works in favor of your overall argument, then why are you working so hard to disprove it? In other words, why are you arguing against yourself? I'll admit that I'm extremely confused by the stance you've taken. You tell me that disproving the StarCraft-genocide analogy will support your stance, and yet you insist that the analogy is true. Huh? Ok let me simplify this for you If starcraft=/=genocide then destiny's use of rape=/= the act of rape I was using the logic of the argument you presented to show you it doesn't work but you don't seem to understand. No, I got that part just fine. What I don't understand is why you're claiming that Starcraft = genocide. Why are you contradicting your own argument? *sigh* It's the equivalent of the saying rape=meaning rape argument presented by those opposed to steven's arguments. Steven is using a word out of it's normal context in a different setting. We are simulating an act out of it's normal context in a different setting. If we take it to be true that saying rape clearly implies the actual act of rape, then we must also take it to be true that simulating genocide implies the actual act of genocide. This however is something that everyone here clearly can't argue because they do it every day. So what does this mean? That the original premise that saying rape implies the actual act of rape must be untrue. I was using my opponents argument, and applying it to show it's not valid or sound. Do you understand? I was using my opponent's argument, applying it to murder, and proving that it doesn't work consideirng that we don't try to mitigate offenses to war veterans, families of dead due to violence, refugees, etc. starcraft is clearly not genocide, and thats why saying rape clearly doesn't imply rape.
First, you wrote this:
If you want to take the moral highground stop playing the game about war, murder, oppression, genocide, racism, and terrorism.
And then you wrote this:
Yes, it is deeply offensive to compare the holocaust to the genocide occuring in the war simulator we play.
Afterwards, you wrote this:
My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
And now, you're claiming this:
starcraft is clearly not genocide.
This is starting to become really amusing. I'm just going to post this and leave it at that.
|
Do you really not understand basic argumentation? This is community college status.
the first quote was using the logic that saying rape is bad. Ive explained this several times. I was arguing from the viewpoint of my opponent. This is argumentation 101. It's not hard to comprehend. You use your opponents argument and apply it to show it doesn't make any sense.
the second quote is what i'm actually trying to state. My personal opinion. The point that makes perfect sense.
Think of it like this. You walk into class and your teacher says "A+B=C but B+B also = C. A=1 B=2 C=3" Now obviously you say "Wait teacher,that would mean B+B would be 2+2=3." Would it be logical to assume you're arguing that's true? No, you're obviously pointing out to the teacher that the problem is wrong by using the logic of the problem to follow it through.
You may want to consider taking some courses at your local college.
|
I believe, ArgosDelta, that we agree on the issue of usage of words in the context of this thread, but disagree on some specifics. Not sure though.
On June 01 2011 09:51 ArgosDelta wrote:
I don't think it's really debatable that in starcraft enough people are being killed to constitute a "part". Considering around 400 people die in the course of 1 hour of starcraft it can add up pretty quickly, not even counting the campaign.
I don't agree with your example, but I get your drift.
"Genocide" only considers humans, and it must be the whole, or a substantial subset of the race that is distinguishable by ethnicity, language or nationality - either of which are tough calls /today/, with people groups of people /presently/ being oppressed.
Which just lends more to the validity of comparing saying "rape", or "nigger" - to playing SC2.
And I think the UN definition of genocide has legitimacy.....to deny the legitimacy of the UN seems odd.
They have a convention, not a definition. It's politics to the UN.
|
On June 01 2011 10:24 allandee wrote:I believe, ArgosDelta, that we agree on the issue of usage of words in the context of this thread, but disagree on some specifics. Not sure though. Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 09:51 ArgosDelta wrote:
I don't think it's really debatable that in starcraft enough people are being killed to constitute a "part". Considering around 400 people die in the course of 1 hour of starcraft it can add up pretty quickly, not even counting the campaign.
I don't agree with your example, but I get your drift. "Genocide" only considers humans, and it must be the whole, or a substantial subset of the race that is distinguishable by ethnicity, language or nationality - either of which are tough calls /today/, with people groups of people /presently/ being oppressed. Which just lends more to the validity of comparing saying "rape", or "nigger" - to playing SC2. Show nested quote +
And I think the UN definition of genocide has legitimacy.....to deny the legitimacy of the UN seems odd.
They have a convention, not a definition. It's politics to the UN.
Yes I think we are in general agreement, I just don't exclude zerg or protoss from genocide definitions since I think if we had several alien species existing with us we'd probably not just slaughter them at random if they were intelligent. I suppose it is a convention as well, but it's nonetheless a reference point for their interference and I'll take any meaning agreed upon by such a large prestigious body that governs world affairs, specifically genocide. I suppose it's just personal differences at this point.
|
On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
Do you really not understand basic argumentation? This is community college status.
the first quote was using the logic that saying rape is bad. Ive explained this several times. I was arguing from the viewpoint of my opponent. This is argumentation 101. It's not hard to comprehend. You use your opponents argument and apply it to show it doesn't make any sense.
the second quote is what i'm actually trying to state. My personal opinion. The point that makes perfect sense.
Think of it like this. You walk into class and your teacher says "A+B=C but B+B also = C. A=1 B=2 C=3" Now obviously you say "Wait teacher,that would mean B+B would be 2+2=3." Would it be logical to assume you're arguing that's true? No, you're obviously pointing out to the teacher that the problem is wrong by using the logic of the problem to follow it through.
You may want to consider taking some courses at your local college.
Okay, so you're saying that StarCraft is not like genocide. Any arguments in which you implied that StarCraft is like genocide was taken from your hypothetical opponent's perspective. Is that correct?
If that's the case, then I'd like you to explain this post:
You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer.
2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.)
3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization.
Nowhere do you indicate that this argument was "taken from the opponent's point of view." In fact, every time you've argued that StarCraft is a "genocide simulator," you NEVER once indicated that it was taken from some imaginary opponent's point of view. It's only AFTER I repeatedly questioned your claims that you "revealed" that your nonsensical comparisons of StarCraft and genocide were taken from some hypothetical, imaginary opponent's perspective.
By the way, the argumentative technique you're employing is known as a "strawman's argument." You might want to check out your local community college to understand why this is a logical fallacy.
|
On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
Do you really not understand basic argumentation? This is community college status.
On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
This is argumentation 101.
On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
You may want to consider taking some courses at your local college.
lol
|
On June 01 2011 10:31 wzzit wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
Do you really not understand basic argumentation? This is community college status.
the first quote was using the logic that saying rape is bad. Ive explained this several times. I was arguing from the viewpoint of my opponent. This is argumentation 101. It's not hard to comprehend. You use your opponents argument and apply it to show it doesn't make any sense.
the second quote is what i'm actually trying to state. My personal opinion. The point that makes perfect sense.
Think of it like this. You walk into class and your teacher says "A+B=C but B+B also = C. A=1 B=2 C=3" Now obviously you say "Wait teacher,that would mean B+B would be 2+2=3." Would it be logical to assume you're arguing that's true? No, you're obviously pointing out to the teacher that the problem is wrong by using the logic of the problem to follow it through.
You may want to consider taking some courses at your local college. Okay, so you're saying that StarCraft is not like genocide. Any arguments in which you implied that StarCraft is like genocide was taken from your hypothetical opponent's perspective. Is that correct? If that's the case, then I'd like you to explain this post: Show nested quote +
You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer.
2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.)
3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization.
Nowhere do you indicate that this argument was "taken from the opponent's point of view." In fact, every time you've argued that StarCraft is a "genocide simulator," you NEVER once indicated that it was taken from some imaginary opponent's point of view. It's only AFTER I repeatedly questioned your claims that you "revealed" that your nonsensical comparisons of StarCraft and genocide were taken from some hypothetical, imaginary opponent's perspective. By the way, the argumentative technique you're employing is known as a "strawman's argument." You might want to check out your local community college to understand why this is a logical fallacy.
I'm sorry that I assumed you could follow basic argumentative techniques.
Your reply is also laced with appeals to ridicule but i'll ignore that for now.
The opponent is neither hypothetical or imaginary, that argument has been used many times in this thread.
"saying rape implies the act of rape" It has been stated in this thread.
It is not a strawman, I'm addressing the argument in this thread that rape implies the actual act of rape, nowhere have i changed that logic in my posts.
saying that the contextual use of rape is equivalent to the contextual action of murder is neither unequivalent or superficial. It is using the same premise that the reference or simulation of a horrific act is inappropriate regardless of context.
It's clearly not a strawman.
|
On June 01 2011 10:44 ArgosDelta wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 10:31 wzzit wrote:On June 01 2011 10:22 ArgosDelta wrote:
Do you really not understand basic argumentation? This is community college status.
the first quote was using the logic that saying rape is bad. Ive explained this several times. I was arguing from the viewpoint of my opponent. This is argumentation 101. It's not hard to comprehend. You use your opponents argument and apply it to show it doesn't make any sense.
the second quote is what i'm actually trying to state. My personal opinion. The point that makes perfect sense.
Think of it like this. You walk into class and your teacher says "A+B=C but B+B also = C. A=1 B=2 C=3" Now obviously you say "Wait teacher,that would mean B+B would be 2+2=3." Would it be logical to assume you're arguing that's true? No, you're obviously pointing out to the teacher that the problem is wrong by using the logic of the problem to follow it through.
You may want to consider taking some courses at your local college. Okay, so you're saying that StarCraft is not like genocide. Any arguments in which you implied that StarCraft is like genocide was taken from your hypothetical opponent's perspective. Is that correct? If that's the case, then I'd like you to explain this post:
You can't just say "Starcraft is NOTHING like genocide" without providing a valid argument for that. My argument is that it is like genocide, war, and terrorism for several reasons.
1. All 3 races have systematically murdered each other throughout the game's history in both the campaign and the multiplayer.
2. 100% of the game is focused on murdering agents of other cultures largely based on their race(species if you wish to call it by that.)
3. The protagonist of Wings of Liberty is a leader of a terrorist organization.
Nowhere do you indicate that this argument was "taken from the opponent's point of view." In fact, every time you've argued that StarCraft is a "genocide simulator," you NEVER once indicated that it was taken from some imaginary opponent's point of view. It's only AFTER I repeatedly questioned your claims that you "revealed" that your nonsensical comparisons of StarCraft and genocide were taken from some hypothetical, imaginary opponent's perspective. By the way, the argumentative technique you're employing is known as a "strawman's argument." You might want to check out your local community college to understand why this is a logical fallacy. I'm sorry that I assumed you could follow basic argumentative techniques. Your reply is also laced with appeals to ridicule but i'll ignore that for now. The opponent is neither hypothetical or imaginary, that argument has been used many times in this thread. "saying rape implies the act of rape" It has been stated in this thread. It is not a strawman, I'm addressing the argument in this thread that rape implies the actual act of rape, nowhere have i changed that logic in my posts. saying that the contextual use of rape is equivalent to the contextual action of murder is neither unequivalent or superficial. It is using the same premise that the reference or simulation of a horrific act is inappropriate regardless of context. It's clearly not a strawman.
You expect me to follow your arguments when you take on the perspective of other people without ever indicating that you are doing so? Really, I suggest you read over your posts in this thread. You sound like a schizophrenic.
Here's a tip for future arguments: if you're going to shift perspectives, then you better indicate BEFOREHAND that you're doing so, instead of retrospectively. I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people who read this thread assumed that you were supporting the idea that StarCraft simulated genocide.
By the way, you are engaging in a strawman argument. Nobody in this thread (other than you) claimed that StarCraft simulates genocide. You're criticizing an extrapolation that you arrived at by yourself, which is the definition of attacking a strawman.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
