[ExI] video games take 2

[William Flynn Wallace]

As a libertarian I must add that I have no objection at all to anyone
playing any sort of game, video or otherwise.  If someone wants to set a
record at Pacman as their life's goal, then he has my respect as human
being, of course, but no respect whatsoever otherwise.  If, as Adrian says,
a sort of glory can be achieved this way, then go for it, as it is likely
the only sort he (and the occasional she) will achieve with that brain.
Flaunting this success as a pickup line will, I am sure, meet with  total
awe on the part of the women he tries it on, though perhaps not the right
sort of awe.

As a psychologist I would have some suspicions about such a person who
seems to want to rot his brain and develop no new neurons at all, but it's
his brain.

As a transhumanist I suggest that this is not at all the sort of person we
want to develop - I suspect I will get no flak over this opinion.

I am going to have to think some more about whether the age of the player
is significant.  I think it is.  A Pacman player of 13 and one of 35 will
be somewhat different.  More research needed.

I have played my share of solitaire on a PC.  I found that it lets me
think, as there is no time pressure in that game.  Or it calms me down,
distracting me from some worry or other.  No harm done.  Not to be
overdone, of course.  No difference between this and a garden walk.

An entirely different situation occurs when the type of video game is
played which requires strategy and tactics.  Now this may in fact be
predictive of success at other types of strategy, such as military or
economic, in which case, as a psychologist, I would be interested in that
data.  It probably exists.

What will people do, it is asked, in the future when machines do all the
work?  Far in the future we cannot see, but video games are slowly giving
way to virtual reality, I have read.

Are we going to try to breed or otherwise genetically eliminate from the
current nature of man a need for some sort of achievement which contributes
to society or at least the family (if families we will have and I think we
will)?  This is the type of person who will be glad to spend his waking
hours at games.  Is this what we want?  Riders of the purple wage?

A problem for the future is to find some ways of contributing to society
when the machines do the work.  It may be that making a better mouse trap
is better done by people, so creativity will be a big asset.

Someone mentioned reading Harlequin romances, presumably as an example of
brainless pastimes.  I actually did a lot of thinking about that.  One
thing that occurred to me is to think about what the men in those women's
lives are not providing them, and what we might teach men about what women
want - the eternal question.

I read a Danielle Steele novel once,just to see what it was all about.  The
main man was intelligent, witty, well-built, polite, cultured and so on.
The main woman was also perfect in many ways.  My daughter tells me that
this is what Steele writes about, so I suspect that one novel is much like
another, like the Harlequin books, though perhaps Steele is at a different
level.

Dreaming, fantasy, escapism - no harm done, a bit of pleasure.  Like ice
cream - to be taken in rational quantities.

I conclude that my main objection is the overdoing of video games, fantasy
books of all kinds, something that might be hard to define in individual
cases.  If we conclude that Pacman-playing riders of the purple wage are OK
with us, then overdoing is not possible.

bill w
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170804/6f10cc2e/attachment.html>