Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Violent video games and movies are conditioning people "Pavlov style" to massacre and murder as

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
I have nothing to add at the moment but I am following as a lurker.

To all involved -
Truly, very interesting your replys for those for - and those against.

Good work OP.
Thanx.




posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   
It's easy to relate to both sides of this issue. On one hand, video games are protected by freedom of speech and are no more influential towards violence than the equivalent movies, tv, news, music, etc. At the same time, video games have also been evolving from military research. The video game and simulation sectors are so closely intertwined now, that most 3D artists, programmers, and game designers jump back and forth between companies like EA and Lockheed Martin, depending on who's currently hiring (and paying the most).

The more this line blurs between video games and military sim in particular, the easier it will be to train a soldier that considers anything on the screen as a "bad guy." That in itself could easily lead towards a completely new breed of warfare.



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by scientist
It's easy to relate to both sides of this issue. On one hand, video games are protected by freedom of speech and are no more influential towards violence than the equivalent movies, tv, news, music, etc. At the same time, video games have also been evolving from military research. The video game and simulation sectors are so closely intertwined now, that most 3D artists, programmers, and game designers jump back and forth between companies like EA and Lockheed Martin, depending on who's currently hiring (and paying the most).

The more this line blurs between video games and military sim in particular, the easier it will be to train a soldier that considers anything on the screen as a "bad guy." That in itself could easily lead towards a completely new breed of warfare.


Rights come with responsibility. The reason we do not give children guns in the first place is because most of them are not mature enough to handle them responsibly even though they have a right to defend themselves as any living being.



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by grandmakdw

Are TPTB encouraging violent movies, tv and video games to reduce the surplus population?


I believe they are.

Don't get me wrong. Censorship obviously isn't the answer. With my libertarian views I would never go along with censoring. But the plain fact is that this "entertainment" is made mostly by liberals and I believe they know what they're doing. They're being deliberately irresponsible because they know the end result will be....

1. That violent entertainment and young minds will be a volatile mix

2. The violence that erupts in the real world as a result will likely involve guns. Which promotes their gun hating agenda by turning the public against even responsible gun owners.

3. At the same time, people will eventually realize that kids watch violent movies and get ideas and this will turn them against freedom of expression

Hollywood is obviously very close to the center of this hydra.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by NihilistSanta
reply to post by Deadlychicken
 


Parenting is definitely an issue and I don't think anyone is downplaying that aspect. After a child reaches school age it becomes much harder. For example when I was a child I had a friend who grew up in a pretty strict household. His mom was a teacher and his dad a pastor or something. No violent video games, no bad television. It was a pretty boring house to play at so my friend would come to my house to play where we could watch or play what we wanted.

The issue is not so simple as some try to make it. We are really dealing with the effects of moral decline which violent video games and media are a symptom. It began with the television age and as women entered the workforce the children were raised by television. That first few generations went on to increased divorce rates, drug use, sexual immorality, then they made video games, books, movies etc and now their children and childrens children are acting out in episodes of mass violence.

This latest generation is being groomed to fill body bags for world war 3. They need soldiers with no morality to commit the atrocities they have planned. Following orders will no longer be enough to get the job done.


If the parents were really that worried about his exposure to these things they would have been in contact with your parents to express these concerns and request he not be exposed to these things. (I have had friends whose parents did exactly that when growing up.) I do however feel it unwise to completely shelter a child from elicit materials their entire life. From my experience humans tend to take an extreme overindulgence into the material when finally exposed, especially when done after their peers. To me it's a psychological reaction of a human feeling they may become a social outcast due to their inability to relate to their peers. I've seen this happen to people with alcohol and other drugs, along with things like pornography and sexually explicit acts. I believe that parents need to be more mature with their children and stop trying to befriend and be overprotective of them. They have to be the guiding force which adds morals along with more seasoned viewpoints to discussions with their children rather than either not being involved at all or giving the simple answer of "that's just how it is".


Originally posted by scientist
It's easy to relate to both sides of this issue. On one hand, video games are protected by freedom of speech and are no more influential towards violence than the equivalent movies, tv, news, music, etc. At the same time, video games have also been evolving from military research. The video game and simulation sectors are so closely intertwined now, that most 3D artists, programmers, and game designers jump back and forth between companies like EA and Lockheed Martin, depending on who's currently hiring (and paying the most).

The more this line blurs between video games and military sim in particular, the easier it will be to train a soldier that considers anything on the screen as a "bad guy." That in itself could easily lead towards a completely new breed of warfare.


The games made with cooperation by the armed forces are also rated Mature, meaning you must be 17 or 18 (in most states) to purchase these games, so the question is who is getting kids these games? It is a case where the parents are either deeming their kid mature enough to view the contents or ill-parenting where they just buy the game to "shut their kid up". Which would bring up an entirely different debate of what to do about these humans who are unfit to be parents. Past that the military does try to use these games more as recruiting tools to get people interested in the military rather than a training tool to make people into the next generation of super soldiers. As much as the military would love an accurate simulation to be able to train their soldiers, no amount of video games or movies will prepare someone for the actual experience of combat.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deadlychicken
The games made with cooperation by the armed forces are also rated Mature, meaning you must be 17 or 18 (in most states) to purchase these games, so the question is who is getting kids these games? It is a case where the parents are either deeming their kid mature enough to view the contents or ill-parenting where they just buy the game to "shut their kid up". Which would bring up an entirely different debate of what to do about these humans who are unfit to be parents. Past that the military does try to use these games more as recruiting tools to get people interested in the military rather than a training tool to make people into the next generation of super soldiers. As much as the military would love an accurate simulation to be able to train their soldiers, no amount of video games or movies will prepare someone for the actual experience of combat.


As a video game enthusiast, and video game player all my life... it's not like getting a video game rated 18+ is as hard as getting a pack of cigarettes. I'm not even referring specifically to warfare games. The same exact principles of auto-aiming, search-and-seize tactics, simulated moral decisions, etc. are in All-ages and teen rated games as well.

For example, the Armored Core franchise, released in 1997 for PS1, and still releasing games now - is rated Teen. That game in particular is a great example of military sim that turned into a game.

Not defending or attacking video games on this - anymore I would attack music or movies. The interesting difference is that the link between DARPA and video games is too close to ignore.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


That's ridiculous. If "TPTB" wanted mass exterminations, that's exactly what they'd get. And they'd be using airborne toxins and biological weapons, not subtle influences that may or may not yield the result of 20-30 deaths. It isn't even enough to make up for the birth rates. Give me a break! Did you forget they have drones with missiles? They could easily drop a bomb on a crowded arena with 60000+ people and say the drone got hacked by Cal Tech students or whatever. And yet we are supposed to believe they will settle for a couple hundred or less deaths in gun shootings?



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonl1983
 


Sorry. I just re-read the post I responded to. I got carried away and posted my response before I realized what I was responding to.

I meant that Hollywood is being used to condition young people to behave in certain ways that are contrary to freedom. Not to cut down on the population.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 06:41 PM
link   
While I agree that modern media can affect certain peoples' behavior significantly, I doubt it is a population reduction attempt. If anything, it is an attempt to boost military recruitment numbers, or get violence "out of our system". Think about it. The government would want to disarm and pacify the population. A violent and dangerous population would be hard to control.
Also, neither operant nor classical conditioning have much to do with this subject. Operant conditioning utilizes a punishment-reward system, while classical conditioning trains by associating stimuli with other, preconditioned stimuli.





new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join