[MD] Virtually meaningful?

[MarshaV]

see below...


At 09:29 PM 9/9/2008, you wrote:
>[DMB]
>Are you inviting me to pass judgment on your whole life, to prescribe a set of
>worthy activities?
>
>[Arlo]
>I don't have to invite you, DMB, isn't this what you're doing? 
>Passing judgment
>on the value of some activities? Even if those activities are meaningful to
>others.
>
>You see, if you said, "hey, Arlo, that's not my cup of tea, but I 
>probably find
>meaning in some activities you don't as well", I'm not sure where the problem
>would be.
>
>So I ask you, if spending time in online worlds is meaningless, then 
>YOU got to
>TELL ME by what specific criteria you make this judgment. And so far you
>haven't. Not a one.
>
>I've assumed it must have something to do with "other people present", and
>proposed two activities "making hot sauces" and "riding solo" that are also
>done without other people around. Are they equally meaningless? Is it "play"?
>What about my weekly Friday poker games? Is that "meaningless"? Is it
>"fantasizing"?
>
>What I want is a consistent set of criteria I can apply across the board to
>determine if a particular activity is meaningful or not. I mean, I 
>want to know
>where I am wrong and finding meaning in an activity that I should consider
>meaningless.
>
>[DMB]
>I'm skeptical about your claims and I have to say that you're not 
>doing much to
>back them up.
>
>[Arlo]
>And I'm saying, if you asked a hot pepper enthusiast what of value he finds in
>making hot sauces, what would you expect him to say? If you asked me, what of
>meaning do you find in long solo weekend rides on the motorcycle, I couldn't
>give you any more than I've given you about online games.
>
>I enjoy them because they are solo, they provide a space and a fun 
>activity for
>my distributed set of friends to engage in, talk, meet others, and play. Like
>poker. Or basketball. Or water skiing. Or floral arranging. The only 
>real issue
>is that it is of value TO ME. I don't care if its of value TO YOU. I fully
>expect others to find fun and value in activities I'd personally find boring
>and wasteful. And so what? Should I make claims about the value they
>experience? Or ask them to "prove" to me in some way why what they are doing
>has value? No.


Hey Arlo,

What is this ME,  and YOU?  Is it the body, the mind, 
both?   Neither?   When you write above, "The only real issue is that 
it is of value TO ME.", what exactly are you defending?   What's 
real?  You wrote to me about many faces, some more real than 
others.  Actually, what do you mean by the word real, and how is it 
determined.  There has never appeared before me an individual with 
more than one face.

There is a lot of difference in your words, it may be that your 
"intertwined yarn-ball of patterns" has the consistency of Bologna,

Marsha






>[DMB]
>It's funny how you seem to be so personally offended by these questions while
>at the same time insisting on the fluidity of the self.
>
>[Arlo]
>I'm not offended. I'm a bit repulsed by the idea of being told what I should
>and what I should not find a valuable use of my time. And I'm a bit surprised
>to hear it from someone whose views I normally respect greatly.
>
>This is why I ask, again, be very clear, David. Tell me precisely what it is
>about online games that you feel make them an activity we can proclaim to be
>meaningless across the board, for all people.
>
>[DMB]
>And no, I don't think the issue revolves around the copresence of corporeal
>bodies...
>
>[Arlo]
>Then...  what?
>
>[DMB]
>I'm not denying the value of "playing" for adults. I'm asking about one
>particular way that one particular adult plays.
>
>[Arl]
>Okay. What makes other play meaningful but this type of play meaningless? Give
>me something here, a criteria, a reason, something I can apply to other
>activities as well.
>
>[DMB]
>But its also true that I never much cared for the literary genre known as
>fantasy and I lost interest in playing Monopoly decades ago. I've heard that
>the game called civilization, on the other hand, is an excellent tool for
>learning about how societies function. Plus it sounds like fun. But 
>that's just
>me. Again, I'm asking if you can say anything specific about what being a
>virtual, magical warrior means to you or your friends.
>
>[Arlo]
>Fair enough. And I never cared much for basketball. Or crochet. Or origami. Or
>collecting stamps. But does that mean they are meaningless activities? Does
>that mean I should proclaim those who find joy in philately as being somehow
>misguided or in err?
>
>Being a virtual shaman (mind you, Aenea is not a warrior), is a way 
>to simulate
>an activity that is impossible to achieve in the corporeal, organic world. In
>the same way that reading Sherlock Holmes stories let's one 
>fantasize about the
>thrills of being a brilliant detective, or watching the latest 
>Batman film lets
>on fantasize about being a superhero, or a vigilante, or just a 
>really cool guy
>in a bat suit.
>
>For me, having been a lifelong fan of Tolkein (among others) Warcraft lets me
>assume the identity of someone in that world, explore dungeons, slay dragons,
>wield powerful magics, and along the while spend time with good friends. It is
>in many ways an "active novel" and even better it is an "infinite story" or
>"never-ending story" if you will. This may not be your cup of tea. If not,
>fine. It is also like a puzzle, a game of logic to deduce where things will
>happen, how to achieve certain results, and how to coordinate play 
>to achieve a
>fluid "victory" condition. War gamers (the grandfathers to role-playing games
>like AD&D) would tell you the same thing, that they lived the life of the
>Allied Generals, or even the sinister-esque fantasy of commanding the Imperial
>Armies of Japan, they were able to see "what if" and along they way simply
>"have fun".
>
>[DMB]
>But here I get the impression that fun is more or less equal to escapism.
>That's one of the things that makes me so skeptical. That's what leads me to
>think that it would be wiser and healthier to get a life from which we don't
>feel the need to escape.
>
>[Arlo]
>Again, DMB, its balance. I enjoy "escaping" into books as well, from history
>books to the great book I am rereading at the moment "Musashi" by Eiji
>Yoshikawa. This is "escape", but you are right, too much escape is 
>an unhealthy
>withdrawl that can lead to depression, alienation, and other social 
>maladies. I
>have NO problem with your criticism of the dangers of over escape,
>over-fantasy, over-play. And if THIS is what you are saying, well we can move
>forward I'd wager. But so long as we are clear that overly escaping 
>in books is
>functionally no different than over-escaping in games (video or poker or
>athletic or otherwise), then we are good.
>
>[DMB]
>Can we really interact with others in a meaningful way via our avatars? I'm
>skeptical.
>
>[Arlo]
>We can, and we do. We are proving it right now.
>
>[DMB]
>there's nothing like seeing the look on your face, reading your 
>gestures. Those
>things convey a huge amount of information so that actual words and concepts
>become a small fraction of what's going on.
>
>[Arlo]
>We are undeniably bound to our organic, biological sensations, and there is no
>doubt in my mind that this provides an important arc in our social engagement.
>But I also think that online engagement can also be rich and meaningful, even
>if I don't have a face to see, or eyes to look into.
>
>[DMB]
>But you're a normal, healthy adult, no? If not, please forgive me.
>
>[Arlo]
>Healthy, yes. Normal? I doubt this more and more with each passing day.
>
>Anyways, I'll respond to other points you've made tomorrow. The Office (US
>version) just came on DVD. That means some escape tonight for me.
>
>
>Moq_Discuss mailing list
>Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>Archives:
>http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

.
.

Shoot for the moon.  Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.........
.
.