Clearly you are not understanding the underlying causes: A person might spend too much time listening to the same music because he’s suffering from a mental illness, or repeating the same activities that put him or her into a ‘safe zone’ as a symptom of something else (e.g. depression). Let’s just ban random stuff we don’t understand- surely people are not going to manifest the same repetitive, obsessive behaviours (which interfere with their day to day life) and channel their illness into some other media.
The biggest flaw is the misuse of the term ‘Violent Video Games’. There has to be considered the differences between online gaming, offline gaming and whether this supports teamwork or not.
18:10
It is absolutely absurd to assume that a person or kid is inclined to show this specific behavior in a social situation because he participate in ‘violent video games’.. There isn’t any argument that supports this correlation nor shows any facts that people who play ‘violent video games’ have this process of thought and behavior.
18:57 – 19:00
This is NOT true. This speaker clearly has not participated in gaming and there is a huge difference between a single player game and an online multiplayer game. Behaving aggressively is not rewarded, especially considering if this is online with other people.
42:00 – 42:10
I quote: "Some parts of the game you have to work in a team. Well, that teamwork aspect, because if you think them as your friends, you are getting social support for behaving aggressively right? So maybe that increases the aggression effects. Or maybe because you are working as a team, you go in with the pro-social motivation to help your team, maybe that mitigates the aggression effects. We don’t know the answer…"
I know the answer, play the actual game! The game in his example is entirely based on playing with (or against) other people. Nothing indicates that if you consider some players as your ‘friends’ (stated by the speaker) that you are getting social support, validation or recognition for behaving aggressively. This is not true. If he actually participated in any of the games he showed during the speech he could have known this fact. If you decide to play an online game such as he showed in his examples, you can’t expect any validation in this. Just as in real life, you are dependent on others within the game and aggressive behavior is not tolerated by any community and these players are regarded "toxic players". The anonymity that we gain from being connected to the internet is most likely playing a role as well.
The speaker’s argument is a fallacy and it’s throughout the entire speech.
MGMC Physician Grand Rounds, 5/20/15
Clearly you are not understanding the underlying causes: A person might spend too much time listening to the same music because he’s suffering from a mental illness, or repeating the same activities that put him or her into a ‘safe zone’ as a symptom of something else (e.g. depression). Let’s just ban random stuff we don’t understand- surely people are not going to manifest the same repetitive, obsessive behaviours (which interfere with their day to day life) and channel their illness into some other media.
The biggest flaw is the misuse of the term ‘Violent Video Games’. There has to be considered the differences between online gaming, offline gaming and whether this supports teamwork or not.
18:10
It is absolutely absurd to assume that a person or kid is inclined to show this specific behavior in a social situation because he participate in ‘violent video games’.. There isn’t any argument that supports this correlation nor shows any facts that people who play ‘violent video games’ have this process of thought and behavior.
18:57 – 19:00
This is NOT true. This speaker clearly has not participated in gaming and there is a huge difference between a single player game and an online multiplayer game. Behaving aggressively is not rewarded, especially considering if this is online with other people.
42:00 – 42:10
I quote: "Some parts of the game you have to work in a team. Well, that teamwork aspect, because if you think them as your friends, you are getting social support for behaving aggressively right? So maybe that increases the aggression effects. Or maybe because you are working as a team, you go in with the pro-social motivation to help your team, maybe that mitigates the aggression effects. We don’t know the answer…"
I know the answer, play the actual game! The game in his example is entirely based on playing with (or against) other people. Nothing indicates that if you consider some players as your ‘friends’ (stated by the speaker) that you are getting social support, validation or recognition for behaving aggressively. This is not true. If he actually participated in any of the games he showed during the speech he could have known this fact. If you decide to play an online game such as he showed in his examples, you can’t expect any validation in this. Just as in real life, you are dependent on others within the game and aggressive behavior is not tolerated by any community and these players are regarded "toxic players". The anonymity that we gain from being connected to the internet is most likely playing a role as well.
The speaker’s argument is a fallacy and it’s throughout the entire speech.
???