lol I'm the exact opposite, I don't think Movies are violent enough.
Violence in Movies
- Thread starter dkwrtw
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
lol I'm the exact opposite, I don't think Movies are violent enough.
-
154Replies
-
3KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
:24: I don't get some violent movies, how does the likes of Arnie and Stallone ever have enemies that can't aim properly?:ninja
you don't see your level head as being part of your conditioning? it must have come from somewhere. If not from social conditioning then it's either learned some other way or it's genetic. I'd say it's probably a combination of all of the above.
when I lose my temper, admittedly it takes a lot to get me there, conscious thought flies out of the window and conditioning takes over. I've seen it in myself, and most people I've ever fought or argued against.
When I was taught self-defense at kick-boxing, for example, we were taught tricks to control the conditioned sides of ourselves. From tapping your foot, to putting up a fence, tilting your head forward, or even asking a question, anything to try and take control of the conditioning and the animal inside us. Most people aren't even aware that conscious thought is one of the first faculties to go in a confrontational situation.
Keeping a level head in a stressful situation is totally feasible, but surely it's something that has to be learned.
well then perhaps it's me that has a problem, because I cannot recall a singe instance of actually losing control of myself, I too have trained martial arts, specifically boxing and wrestling, and when the timer goes off I freeze in mid punch, I've never accidentally struck a person after the timer, it's the same when I grapple I'm constantly thinking and aware of what's going on around me, I'm on the ground with a 250 guy on top of me and I hear my coach say to one of my training partners "He could go for a kneebar right now", so I do, I don't get it but It gets me out of the position I'm in, I'm always thinking clearly even in a situation like that, and I expect others to be able to do the same :dunno
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
I'm confused. Do you believe in free-will or do you believe in compatibilism?
well I'm reading up on "compatibilism" right now and I come across this quote:
"Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills"
I don't feel like reading the entire page, but is that the basic philosophy behind compatibilism? I can't agree with that at all, one can choose to act AGAINST his own will, it's called restraint, I want to do things all the time, but I don't because I have self control, doing something that you know to be a bad idea because you want to do it is weak mindedness, again you CAN stop yourself from acting on your impulses, there is nobody out there who truly just "can't help it".
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
Okay, well here I make a few assumptions...
If you believe entirely in free-will, and free-will being opposite to determinism (determinism: all things are caused, so free-will: things not caused), then doesn't that imply that things just happen out of nowhere? If things are not caused, then they just happen, randomly. How does that give you a choice?
One misperception about determinism is that some people think that determinism means you have no choice/everything is pre-determined/fatalistic. Well no, determinism recognises that things are caused - that everything in your life that you have done or made a decision from has been caused by something. But the individual has always had a choice in which decision to make along the way.
Just because you can't find a cause, doesn't mean there isn't one, whether external OR internal.
But, if you believe in free-will, that things are not caused, and events are random, therefore actions are independent of the person who performs them...then how can you say that people are still responsible for their own actions?
Isn't that to allow that the act was produced by that person, they caused it in the first place? Because the decision came from something inside them (remember that causes can be internal, not JUST external).
So it seems redundant to say that everyone has a free-choice when obviously it was caused by something.
That's a little compatibilistic, because it allows a little determinism.
Tying this in to the actual topic...you can't really say that you can just restrain yourself from everything and control everything. There are some decisions you are more likely to make more than others because they are caused by something.
What made you go and start fights with those people? It's not always external, so your behaviour is still caused by something, but which could have been shaped by something external. You obviously got annoyed with something that person did and thought to yourself "Let's start a fight". So whatever is making you angry at the time CAUSED the behaviour, yet you still had a choice in what decision to make. However, that cause is what made you more likely to start the fight.
When I get really pissed off I do enjoy throwing a tantrum, and I always have a choice whether to throw it or not. However, I can't help it if I do. Something has caused it. You see? Even though something causes it, I still have a choice. But it's the cause that determines what I am more likely to do.
And, tying this into the original topic...this is important for those younger people who watch violent things on TV. I guess it can't cause children to act violently alone. Many people would recognise that MANY factors cause something. So I guess you could say that both living in a working class family, drug-addict parents, abuse, bullying, violence on TV, the child observing all these things is more likely to turn out violent or imitate them. Particularly because as the child's parents are drug addicts, they probably lack the parenting skills needed to educate the child about morals, and stop the child from watching whatever violent thing is on the idiot box.
If you believe entirely in free-will, and free-will being opposite to determinism (determinism: all things are caused, so free-will: things not caused), then doesn't that imply that things just happen out of nowhere? If things are not caused, then they just happen, randomly. How does that give you a choice?
One misperception about determinism is that some people think that determinism means you have no choice/everything is pre-determined/fatalistic. Well no, determinism recognises that things are caused - that everything in your life that you have done or made a decision from has been caused by something. But the individual has always had a choice in which decision to make along the way.
Just because you can't find a cause, doesn't mean there isn't one, whether external OR internal.
But, if you believe in free-will, that things are not caused, and events are random, therefore actions are independent of the person who performs them...then how can you say that people are still responsible for their own actions?
Isn't that to allow that the act was produced by that person, they caused it in the first place? Because the decision came from something inside them (remember that causes can be internal, not JUST external).
So it seems redundant to say that everyone has a free-choice when obviously it was caused by something.
That's a little compatibilistic, because it allows a little determinism.
Tying this in to the actual topic...you can't really say that you can just restrain yourself from everything and control everything. There are some decisions you are more likely to make more than others because they are caused by something.
What made you go and start fights with those people? It's not always external, so your behaviour is still caused by something, but which could have been shaped by something external. You obviously got annoyed with something that person did and thought to yourself "Let's start a fight". So whatever is making you angry at the time CAUSED the behaviour, yet you still had a choice in what decision to make. However, that cause is what made you more likely to start the fight.
When I get really pissed off I do enjoy throwing a tantrum, and I always have a choice whether to throw it or not. However, I can't help it if I do. Something has caused it. You see? Even though something causes it, I still have a choice. But it's the cause that determines what I am more likely to do.
And, tying this into the original topic...this is important for those younger people who watch violent things on TV. I guess it can't cause children to act violently alone. Many people would recognise that MANY factors cause something. So I guess you could say that both living in a working class family, drug-addict parents, abuse, bullying, violence on TV, the child observing all these things is more likely to turn out violent or imitate them. Particularly because as the child's parents are drug addicts, they probably lack the parenting skills needed to educate the child about morals, and stop the child from watching whatever violent thing is on the idiot box.
Kimmy I chose to go and start fights with people because I am an asshole, I can't blame THEM or anyone else for my own actions, I didn't just go berserk and start assaulting them out of nowhere, I was thinking clearly and in full control of myself the entire time, I went out of my way to make it happen, just like all the fights I've been in have been of my own doing so too have your temper tantrums, nothing is MAKING you throw a tantrum, you WANT to throw one.
"One of the annoying things about believing in free will and individual responsibility is the difficulty of finding somebody to blame your problems on. And when you do find somebody, it's remarkable how often his picture turns up on your driver's license." - P.J. O'Rourke 
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
Well then being an asshole caused it right? You just said "Such and such happened BECAUSE I am a such and such".
I don't think you believe in free-will for what it is, it appears that you believe in some form that things are caused by something.
My basic point was, if you say someone is responsible for their own actions, they have the choice, but that recognises that it was caused, and therefore, the choice was determined by the cause, and there was a lack of 'free choice' in that situation. So you had the choice, but not 'free-choice' free from causation.
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
"One of the annoying things about believing in free will and individual responsibility is the difficulty of finding somebody to blame your problems on. And when you do find somebody, it's remarkable how often his picture turns up on your driver's license." - P.J. O'Rourke
The problem with this quote here is that it contradicts itself. It agrees that with free-will, events happen out of nowhere, so therefore nobody can take ownership of their actions. But then it goes on to say that people can take ownership (responsibility) for their own actions. Compatibilistic I think.
But there's no such thing as Free Will. See we're all on a predetermined path that begins when we're born and ends when we die. We have no choice but to follow where this path leads us. It's already been determined if we are going to be functioning members of society or psychopathic killers.
See we're all on a predetermined path that begins when we're born and ends when we die. We have no choice but to follow where this path leads us. It's already been determined if we are going to be functioning members of society or psychopathic killers. yes Kimmy I CHOOSE to behave like an asshole, it is as you say I caused it, nothing they did, nothing anybody else did, nothing I watched on TV, nothing I saw in a Videogame, nothing I read in a book, nothing my parents raised me to do, but ME and ME alone, should somebody else be held responsible because I got out of my car and beat them up? of course not.
The Quote is meant to be Ironic Kimmy, it is to say that when I inevitably do something stupid and fuck myself over that I will have only myself to blame for it.
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
But with all causation matters, there was something that caused you to 'choose to be an asshole' at some point in your life. Things in your life shape you to be who you are, everybody's life is different, hence individual differences really...
It's like one thing will cause another. Me having toast for breakfast will make me feel sick, which will make me go to the doctor, which will make me take pills, which will potentially make me feel better. However, even though it SEEMS that I was made to do those things, I still had a choice. It's just that the way I was raised, that caused me to make those decisions, not just the preceding event. The way I was raised (knowing that if you're sick, go to the doc), is likely to cause me to go to the doctor when I am sick, even though I don't have to. I can still decide not to. Hell, I even have decided not to lol!
I don't think it's fatalistic though (i.e., if something happens it is bound to make you do something). Causes can't predict in concrete what will happen, after all, you have a choice. So if someone predicts that taking pills will make me feel better, well hell I can just not take the pills and get better anyway, you never know, because of the choice thing. It's just that with causes, they sort of determine which choice you may make or are likely to make...so it's sort of shaped (if you all know what I mean, sounding the least fatalistic as possible lol). And usually it's the combination of all these events and things in life that shape us to make the choices we make...
Last edited by a moderator:
Kimmy you will drive yourself mad trying to find a deeper meaning behind everything, sometimes there just isn't one, some things just ARE.
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
Cause and reason (meaning) are two different things. All I'm saying is that everything is caused. The reasons behind why they are caused, I don't care. I am happy to just look back on my life and recognise that everything I did or happened to me was caused, by internal forces or external forces, which, jumping ahead, means I don't have to regret anything I did or "wish that what I knew now I knew back then".
"Psychobabble is ... a set of repetitive verbal formalities that kills off the very spontaneity, candor, and understanding it pretends to promote. It's an idiom that reduces psychological insight to a collection of standardized observations, that provides a frozen lexicon to deal with an infinite variety of problems." - Richard Dean Rosen
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
If that was aimed at me that's a little silly. The way I write is my natural way of writing and my normal vocabulary. That quote is also hypocritical. Psychobabble is using complex language to hide empty flawed content or overwhelm the reader. I had to Google it to actually know what it meant...the sites I found wrote the definition more concisely and using less 'big words'. The way I even described it above was much more easier to understand than that rubbish quote, no offense.
You're more likely to find psychobabble in literature where writers will use it for those purposes as listed above, and in pseudoscience.
What I said was easy to understand. But if you don't get what I said (after all, I did make some assumptions), you can ask me what I mean instead of just denying everything I say.
78,874Threads
2,185,388Messages
4,959Members