From: Steele, Kirk A (SteeleKA@nafm.misawa.af.mil)
Date: Thu Feb 14 2002 - 16:08:51 MST
>From a clinical perspective, the "Children become violent because they play
violent video games" idea has resisted direct causal investigation. What has
been shown is the emergence of a multi-factoral correlation relating
patterns of parental scaffolding, moral development of the child, self
regulation, and several issues of neuropathology. The video games in and of
themselves have been shown to not directly lead to the violence. Any
activity that is that densely packed with aggressive behavior without
showing societal consequence will seed these acting out behaviours.
200 years ago the mass public, silver bullet cause of violence in youth was
women's attire (small surprise there). Then there was horse riding, and then
organised sports came into vogue, and that still hasn't gone out of style as
being "the cause" of violent behavior.
So, consider this.
There are many behaviours that fit a certain schema. When uncouched in
proper societal consequence, that is, when divorced from their consequences
either spatially or ritualistically, when engaged in to a compulsive degree,
can apparently condition the participant to a predisposed acceptability of
regarding violent behavior as an appropriate means of conflict resolution.
Virtual violence doesn't kill people. A lack of proper parenting kills
people.
Childbirth is no longer appropriately an inalienable right. Especially when
it has been shown that only 1 eighth of the population is capable of
properly bringing a new member of our future society from the cradle to the
voting booth. And much fewer of them still, actually choose to bear
children.
Like the song says, "stupid people breeding everywhere".
I think China has got the best approach for the long term survival of the
species. Establish an institution of parental licensing. Prove to society
that you are worthy of the privilege of adding to the future societal
burden. Link I.Q. to breeding license. Neuter Stupid. The Big Blue Marble we
call Earth is too small to permit dumb to run rampant from the womb anymore.
Kirkasaurus Wrecks
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Ridge [mailto:richard_ridge@tao-group.com]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 2:59 AM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: Cannabinoid receptors and munchies : reprise
> It's certainly not a clean cause-effect relationship.
I'm not sure it's a relationship at all. As far as I'm aware, studies have
showed heightened levels of adrenaline present within the bloodstream after
playing violent video games. But you'd expect that. Again, I suspect it
would require a certain mindset to incorporate violent memes into their
personal memeplex, or as the psychopath in Scream put it in a quote I'm fond
of; 'movies don't create sociopaths, they just make sociopaths more
creative.'
> Just to clarify, I endorse materialism 100%. What I worry about is the
> people for whom the goodies are not enjoyed as goods but purely as status
> symbols.
Or as some means of group identification? I'd have to admit to some
ambivalence on that score, as I don't see group identification as
necessarily a problem, as long as it doesn't preclude further memetic
inclusion or lead to UTistic behaviour. There's nothing that irritates me
more than goths saying how they want to escape the trappings of conformism
of mainstream society, when their clothes render them indistinguishable from
their chosen group of peers. Suggesting that this is assertion of
individuality rather than group identification is something I find intensely
annoying. I don't know to what extent this would be a cultural phenomenon or
a genetic one - I'd suspect the former. That said, my instinct would be to
agree with you on this point.
> They parrot what's told to them - by their parents, their
> president, their teachers and their televisions. I would agree with you,
> though, that the number of influences is pulling people into comparing
> competing memes more than ever before, and choosing the ones that
> work. So I'd say yes, we are more individualistic at this point in
history, but I'd
> also say we have a long way to go.
I don't think there's anything to disagree with there. Quite disappointing
really :-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:43 MDT