Lol, i've literally been laughing my ass off on most of the topics here, and other forums. It seems every forum I go to, theres always a flame war/haters. So I was bored and I just woke up now (about 10-15 min. ago), and I wanted to ask, what do you think is more violent, Internet or Reality. Mostly I mean which influences kids to turn into modern jackasses (did i say that?)....
-=consider this my worst topic, i jsut re-read it and i dont think it makes sense....=-
ID:192656
 May 30 2002, 6:27 am
|
|
nice post, it's the most, boast, of buttered toast, if ya know...the roast is almost done, this world will be shot down by a little corny gun, TV, Internet people, users, bums......
| |
Gojira wrote:
Where exactly in europe? Who me? I'm currently in Oldenburg, Germany...just west of Bremen. | |
digitalmouse wrote:
One of the problems (I think) in all this violent attitude online or offline, is the lack of worldy experience on the part of the person involved. People who have 'seen-the-world' - traveled around a bit - tend to be much more open-minded, much more tolerant, and a dang bit more happy with themselves. One of my peeves lately is the growing realization that it is so easy for kids (and most adults) to sterotype and shun what they do not know - mostly because of their ignorance or lack of experience! I think it's a lack of interpersonal experience, namely in the basic tenets of respect, that makes people get nasty online; also sometimes it's a lack of ability to connect an abstract name on the screen with the concept of an actual person, which short-circuits a few social mechanisms. Personally, I avoid stereotyping what I don't know but readily categorize what I do. To blindly accept a stereotype is extreme folly; to develop a pretty good one based on experience isn't necessarily a bad thing. I dated a girl in New Hampshire in the early 90`s whose farthest travel experience up to the age of 19 was to go to Boston - an hour away! When we both moved to Savannah, Georgia, she could never understand how I easily adjusted to the local culture, and made friends so easily with complete strangers - this was completely foriegn to her! (Of course I had lived in Atlanta earlier in my life - but that is another story). I enjoyed travelling with my family 2 or 3 times a year to various places in the US, Mexico, and Canada when I was growing up - and now I continue that trend while living in Europe. I feel more open-headed, and confident in dealing with strangers. You're dealing with culture shock, here, which is very much a separate issue. I also think you're mistaking correlation for cause and effect. It could well be that someone who travels a lot does so out of preference, and an affinity for meeting other cultures. It seems a big mistake, to me, to assume one personality type is better than another on the basis you described. Although, not to delve too much into stereotypes here, this idea that traveling widely and experiencing all cultures is intrinsically good is very much a European attitude, so I'm not too surprised you feel that way. But I think it's more accurate to say that the perceived intrinsic good really belongs to something else: To whatever degree you can feel at home away from home, it's important to treat all people with respect. I think my point (if there is one) is that violence in most any form is a reaction to what you are afraid of, or do not know about. Violence takes a lot more forms than that; ignorance and fear aren't the only things that can breed it. You can know a person perfectly well and yet hate them all the more for it. Indeed, the deepest animosities in history came from groups of people who were geographical neighbors for centuries, who knew each other very well. And don't forget civil wars, which happen among people who know each other even better. I think you're confusing "not knowing" or "not understanding" with "not agreeing". (This too is a European thing, though not exclusively.) It can and does happen, often, that no matter how much you talk with somebody about a subject, and no matter how civilly you do it, you'll still disagree. A common thought along those lines is "If those two would just sit down and talk for a long time, they could find a way to work it out." Recent events are proving this more a fallacy than ever. History shows that talking things out only works when both sides are eager to forge a solution, and willing to make compromises to do so. Even a cursory study of the origins of violence proves its causes extend well beyond fear or ignorance. I think kids should go on world-tour trips (non-drug induced) as often as possible so that they can experience other lands - this would surely quell future violent tendencies to other cultures based on ignorance... It would cure some ignorance, anyway, which would quell whatever violence is based on it (which isn't really a lot). But money and time restrictions aside, I don't think this is a great idea. Travel carries its risks, too; so whether, where, and when to travel is a decision best left to each family. The premise that ignorance sparks most or even a significant amount of violence is incredibly weak at best. A more common cause of violence, though certainly not the only one, is a breakdown (or lack) of mutual respect. Humans tend to do things from time to time that can make each another angry; by respect, we learn to avoid these situations when possible, to apologize when we cross a line by accident, to forgive others their own mistakes, and to allow room for error in knowing that not everyone can avoid offending us. (Political correctness is founded on overemphasizing the first principle and ignoring the last; that is, it's a warped form of respect.) Many would actually say anger is the main cause of violence (though not the only one), which is generally true--but anger tends to come from a breakdown of respect, when we or someone else violates the implicit rules of good conduct between human beings. If you steal my stereo, I'm gonna be ticked off and it'll be your fault; if you're wearing a gaudy plaid and it makes me angry, the fault is mine. (Yes, it's a dumbed-down example.) Lummox JR | |
If you mean literal or physical violence, reality is definitely the more violent. But if you mean emotional or verbal violence, the Internet tops the cake because when people talk to other people in reality, they tend to be a little more careful in what they say. On the Internet, people don't think twice before insulting or threatening you, or doing anything that could damage someone emotionally.
In reality, people have consequences for their actions. On the Internet, there's no reason to hold back. | |
Lummox, I whole-heartedly agree on ever point you made -- my babble was but one small area of my understanding of the problems associated with violent behavior; certainly not an all-emcompassing opinion...
Respect, or lack thereof, certainly plays an important part in the relations of humans (and other mammals to some extent - dogs/wolves for example have a good respect 'hierarchy' mechanism in the pack, but I digress). My personal take was on the effect a lack of travel experience has in contributing to an individuals view of the rest of the world - certainly not the only factor, but one I often easily see in people who just don't 'leave home' often, if ever. When I was traveling in the States with my parents, it was painfully obvious to see how people in different parts of the country poorly viewed the rest of the country, or even the rest of the world (if they were aware of it). Opinions highly refined through their own media interpretation, or handed down from older generations who had little or no experience themselves, seem to prevail even in todays 'connected' world. I've got people who email me with words like "so how is it living over there with the Nazis?" because that is all they know about Germany, besides thinking that everyone here wears those funny looking pants and drinks beer all the time. They have no clue! To be fair, there are people here who think that all Americans come from Texas, and wear cowboy boots and hats (I umm...usually don't tell them right away that I was born in San Antonio, Texas...and I left my boots in Georgia), but these kinds of people are a minority... | |
interesting topic, but I think i'm going to quote a response to a letter in Playstation Magazine about game violence-
Personally, I also think it's a load of crap. Parents said the same things about rock music and Mad Magazine back in the '50s, but there wasn't any hard evidence that showed either form of entertainment caused or promoted violent behavoir in kids. Games aren't to blame; what is to blame is the fact that most families don't take an active enough roll in their kids' life. Kids that recieve the proper love, attention and care aren't going to go sour no matter how many violent video games, movies, or TV shows they are exposed to. Of course, when anyone goes looking for someone to blame, the last place they look is themselves. No one wants to take responsibility for their own actions nowadays, and that's a real shame. -Bill Donohue Great response, and very, very true. | |
True, i know what you mean although i never thought of it that way. I my self have never left the US but have been all though it.i have met alot of people and seen a lot of land. I easly ajust to blend in with any crowd with littlwe problems. I rarly anger anyone of any background. But i know people that have never when forther than the county limites, and there the ones pissing off everyone and being rude to anyone that seems weird. So from what i know your kinda right, but this does not aply all the time.
| |
Scoobert wrote:
So from what i know your kinda right, but this does not And of course I do not claim that it applies all the time - but it is certainly is a contributing factor... | |
Airson wrote:
interesting topic, but I think i'm going to quote a I myself have used that very same kind of rebuttal for people who wave the flag of morality and righteousness in the faces of the game publishers, the music industry, and who-ever else can be blamed. It does annoy me sometimes when people start acting like religious zealots when something bad happens - "ban everything! it's evil!". There was just recently a teenager here in Germany that shot up a school (ala Columbine style), and the schools and parents were quick to point out that it must have been because he played CounterStrike alot. Turns out he just had a long run of disappointments, depression, bad luck, poor grades, rejection, etc. - and it all added up to pushing him over the edge... CounterStrike was just an safe outlet for this pent-up aggression at the world in general. It was nice to see that the media here showed both sides of the story... | |
I'm sure reality is more violent - death is pretty difficult to come back from in reality (though not impossible depending on who's theology you believe in); just a simple 'reload', 'undo', 'refresh' or what-have-you, to bring oneself back from internet 'death'...
One of the problems (I think) in all this violent attitude online or offline, is the lack of worldy experience on the part of the person involved. People who have 'seen-the-world' - traveled around a bit - tend to be much more open-minded, much more tolerant, and a dang bit more happy with themselves. One of my peeves lately is the growing realization that it is so easy for kids (and most adults) to sterotype and shun what they do not know - mostly because of their ignorance or lack of experience!
I dated a girl in New Hampshire in the early 90`s whose farthest travel experience up to the age of 19 was to go to Boston - an hour away! When we both moved to Savannah, Georgia, she could never understand how I easily adjusted to the local culture, and made friends so easily with complete strangers - this was completely foriegn to her! (Of course I had lived in Atlanta earlier in my life - but that is another story). I enjoyed travelling with my family 2 or 3 times a year to various places in the US, Mexico, and Canada when I was growing up - and now I continue that trend while living in Europe. I feel more open-headed, and confident in dealing with strangers.
Any time I meet someone who has travelled alot (even in the US), I come away with a feeling that this person is more open-minded, tolerent (of course to a point), and confident... a far cry better than the person who has never left their hometown/state/country and complains/whines/stamps their feet about people they never see, much less know about...
I think my point (if there is one) is that violence in most any form is a reaction to what you are afraid of, or do not know about. I think kids should go on world-tour trips (non-drug induced) as often as possible so that they can experience other lands - this would surely quell future violent tendencies to other cultures based on ignorance...