8 Bit Philosophy: Why do Haters Hate?
- Thread starter 8-Bit Philosophy
- Start date
So... is the sites thing going to be getting rid of content creators on their site and just putting up Youtube channel videos that I'm already subscribed to? That's fine, don't get me wrong. But without original videos here, I don't have too much reason to come this site over others.
Also, of course a "haters gon hate!"
Also, of course a "haters gon hate!"
I was a bit disappointed: When I heard "Diogenes of Sinope", I was hoping that we were about to get some anecdotes and examples. That man was (by all, fragmentary accounts) an absolute badass.
According to legend, Alexander the Great came to meet him (in the clay jar that Diogenes lived in, because obviously), and asked if there was anything he could do for the philosopher.
Diogenes replied: "Yes, stand out of my sunlight".
Alexander the Great decides to take this in good humour, and says "If I were not Alexander, I would wish to be Diogenes"
Diogenes comes right back with: "If I were not Diogenes, I would also wish to be Diogenes".
Burn.
Aside from that, a decent ~3 minutes. If there was a LOT more of this old youtube stuff (not that I had seen it) being posted here, the Escapist could begin to patch its content hole with a "curated content" angle.
Although if the noises that the staff are making have trousers backing them up, maybe there will be enough original content to deal with the issue. It would be hatin' to say that this is unlikely, but I guess I am... Actually nah, I am pulling out of that reference.
According to legend, Alexander the Great came to meet him (in the clay jar that Diogenes lived in, because obviously), and asked if there was anything he could do for the philosopher.
Diogenes replied: "Yes, stand out of my sunlight".
Alexander the Great decides to take this in good humour, and says "If I were not Alexander, I would wish to be Diogenes"
Diogenes comes right back with: "If I were not Diogenes, I would also wish to be Diogenes".
Burn.
Aside from that, a decent ~3 minutes. If there was a LOT more of this old youtube stuff (not that I had seen it) being posted here, the Escapist could begin to patch its content hole with a "curated content" angle.
Although if the noises that the staff are making have trousers backing them up, maybe there will be enough original content to deal with the issue. It would be hatin' to say that this is unlikely, but I guess I am... Actually nah, I am pulling out of that reference.
Is it just me, or was that a whole bunch of nothing? It seems like they just wanted to ramble a bit about Diogenese and Cynicism with any real point, then gave it a really misleading title.
I'm starting to understand why philosophy majors tend to end up with jobs teaching philosophy.
I'm starting to understand why philosophy majors tend to end up with jobs teaching philosophy.
One of my favourite Diogenes quotes: In a rich man's house there is nowhere to spit but in his face.
Not very good at all, I have to admit The Escapist is going down hill and it should put more effort into actual content related to geekdom rather than leftist political statements (not even always connected to geekdom directly, with geekdom just being a lead in) and philosophy. I remember the days when Bob was a lot more laid back with it than he is now and he was really the only one leaning in that direction, at least so openly. "There Will Be Brawl", "ENN", "Doomsday Arcade", and others. I'm not sure what's up with The Escapist, but yes, they need to start looking towards getting some better content, and this is coming from a Pub Club member. In my case it's not just because I disagree with a lot of the political stuff, it's because the site just isn't catering to escapism anymore, which is what "The Escapist" is supposed to be. Let's be honest, I get involved in games, comics, etc... to get away from politics, my own views depress even me, and I think the world generally sucks, the same is true of other people with radically different political and social perspectives. If I want to hear rants about feminism or racial injustice or whatever else there are other places for that, I don't really care that some people are trying to bring that into gaming and geek culture, I want to hear about the gaming and geek culture itself and not the rest of this nonsense that seems to infect everything.
That said I think the answer is that Haters as a general rule are those trying to bring change, you really can't accomplish anything on your own, especially in today's world. Even in the days of Diogenes he didn't accomplish much except to be remembered as a huge oddball. Today if you did the same thing you'd just be another crazy homeless person, cutting yourself off from technology in particular would almost surely doom you to obscurity as well. Trust me the days when it was odd enough for a guy to say live in a jar are long gone, the king of the land isn't going to come down to investigate, rather mental health officials are likely to just cart you off (or you'll likely be ignored).
That said I'll also point out that most discourse is negative because there is only so much people can say that's positive when they don't know each other. Basically you can only say "gee I love this [insert something here]" once in a conversation and then if everyone agrees with you there isn't usually a lot to talk about. As a general rule the so called "haters" are the ones that actually generate conversation and bring perspective, and even when you disagree with them they can oftentimes give you a different perspective on things. Face to face with someone you know it's pretty easy to have a conversation about mutual love of something, but over something like an internet forum, or in casual discourse it's somewhat more difficult, as fast as the internet is there is still a turn around time on message boards and such.
EDIT: I've been busy recently and missed some of the stuff about The Escapist trying to become more apolitical and other recent events, and the controversy about having a writer (even if not an employee) who has been connected to some right wing points of view (while I might be more incline to agree with him on certain matters, I still think politics shouldn't be a big topic here, something which the general manager seems to be agreeing with). That said I am not impressed with "8 Bit Philosophy" which wasn't really political in any direct sense, but had little to do with geek culture.
That said I stand by my basic point that we need to see more in the way of original, non-political content. People doing skits/ultra low budget shows and such was part of what attracted me to the site. IMO the most "political" The Escapist should get is in criticizing the game industry and it's business practices (when such is appropriate).
That said I think the answer is that Haters as a general rule are those trying to bring change, you really can't accomplish anything on your own, especially in today's world. Even in the days of Diogenes he didn't accomplish much except to be remembered as a huge oddball. Today if you did the same thing you'd just be another crazy homeless person, cutting yourself off from technology in particular would almost surely doom you to obscurity as well. Trust me the days when it was odd enough for a guy to say live in a jar are long gone, the king of the land isn't going to come down to investigate, rather mental health officials are likely to just cart you off (or you'll likely be ignored).
That said I'll also point out that most discourse is negative because there is only so much people can say that's positive when they don't know each other. Basically you can only say "gee I love this [insert something here]" once in a conversation and then if everyone agrees with you there isn't usually a lot to talk about. As a general rule the so called "haters" are the ones that actually generate conversation and bring perspective, and even when you disagree with them they can oftentimes give you a different perspective on things. Face to face with someone you know it's pretty easy to have a conversation about mutual love of something, but over something like an internet forum, or in casual discourse it's somewhat more difficult, as fast as the internet is there is still a turn around time on message boards and such.
EDIT: I've been busy recently and missed some of the stuff about The Escapist trying to become more apolitical and other recent events, and the controversy about having a writer (even if not an employee) who has been connected to some right wing points of view (while I might be more incline to agree with him on certain matters, I still think politics shouldn't be a big topic here, something which the general manager seems to be agreeing with). That said I am not impressed with "8 Bit Philosophy" which wasn't really political in any direct sense, but had little to do with geek culture.
That said I stand by my basic point that we need to see more in the way of original, non-political content. People doing skits/ultra low budget shows and such was part of what attracted me to the site. IMO the most "political" The Escapist should get is in criticizing the game industry and it's business practices (when such is appropriate).
This video feels very much like propaganda. The thing that worries me most is that I'm not sure what viewpoint it is trying to sell.
Saying that you live a more virtuous life without social convention is an oxy-moron as virtues are socially constructed ideals.
Saying that freedom above all, self sufficiency and conformity with nature are the hallmarks of a virtuous cynic is ridiculous. How can you claim to value freedom above all while 'conforming' with nature? What does that even mean? No one is self-sufficient, we rely on each other to survive. You did not drill the oil that was used to make the synthetic fibers in your clothes, nor did you make that synthetic fabric, nor did you make the clothing themselves, similarly you did not mine the copper, silicon, zinc, nickel etc. that makes up the components of the computer that this video was made with, nor did you craft those individual components. Conforming with nature is being social and reliant on society!
The irony of this is that no one was less self-sufficient that the original cynics, who were often beggars and relied on the generosity of society to not die.
Saying that you live a more virtuous life without social convention is an oxy-moron as virtues are socially constructed ideals.
Saying that freedom above all, self sufficiency and conformity with nature are the hallmarks of a virtuous cynic is ridiculous. How can you claim to value freedom above all while 'conforming' with nature? What does that even mean? No one is self-sufficient, we rely on each other to survive. You did not drill the oil that was used to make the synthetic fibers in your clothes, nor did you make that synthetic fabric, nor did you make the clothing themselves, similarly you did not mine the copper, silicon, zinc, nickel etc. that makes up the components of the computer that this video was made with, nor did you craft those individual components. Conforming with nature is being social and reliant on society!
The irony of this is that no one was less self-sufficient that the original cynics, who were often beggars and relied on the generosity of society to not die.
I felt that is was little strange viewpoint, as it displayed only the negative of hate itself.
People easily forget that hate is the most, if not the one of the most powerful force of social groups - generally social groups with... infamy, such as Nazies, KKK, US after 9/11, 4 major gaming console owners quibbling against each other(PC included) and so on. Hate against certain group can mend the divided and imbue one group with the purpose. However it does not mean that hate can be used as a constructive force. It can be, it just isn't most of the time.
Which brings me to the second question, is social group worth it with you being hater?
By all means, that is not something I will argue. That depends entirely on you.
As for being a Cynic,
This comic seems apt, for now.
http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2817
People easily forget that hate is the most, if not the one of the most powerful force of social groups - generally social groups with... infamy, such as Nazies, KKK, US after 9/11, 4 major gaming console owners quibbling against each other(PC included) and so on. Hate against certain group can mend the divided and imbue one group with the purpose. However it does not mean that hate can be used as a constructive force. It can be, it just isn't most of the time.
Which brings me to the second question, is social group worth it with you being hater?
By all means, that is not something I will argue. That depends entirely on you.
As for being a Cynic,
This comic seems apt, for now.
http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2817
I find this a really interesting issue: group-based hatred seems to have been the major factor behind the majority of the darkest parts of human history. I like Aldous Huxley's take on it, where in a discussion of the vices that societies face (sex, drugs, alcohol etc.) refers to it as "herd-poison", and ranks it as the most deadly addiction that cultures develop: particularly because it gives people a high and removes agency while allowing them to feel like they are being virtuous for doing so.Pirate Of PC Master race said:
As you say, hate can be a factor in constructive actions. But I feel like this is incidental rather than causative.
Take a judge and jury in a case where a man has allegedly committed a heinous crime.
Is it possible for them to give a fair judgement if they do not hate the man? Yes: at least as possible as if they did hate him. The evidence is still the same, as is the law.
If they do hate him,they are more likely to give an unfair judgement than if they don't. Nevertheless, they still have a chance of delivering a fair judgement. But in this case, the hate has a negative effect on average: even if they happen to get it right.
Is being a hater worth it for the social group membership? Nah, hatred is just a valley of spike traps laced with PCP.
(8)Bit of a false dichotomy, makes a giant assumption that being critical of a norm is caused from a rejection of it, this will be true in a handful of cases, but not for most. A great reason to be critical of a norm (among many other reasons to be critical for good or bad) is because it does apply to you / you enjoy the spirit or most aspects of that norm, but because you have a different perspective than the culture which originally defined the norm you have issue with its implementation or the like. For those it entirely misses the point, also, like others have said was more of a 'fun' highschool teacher's version of a history/philosophy lesson than it was a video about why people are critical or like the title says, why do haters hate?
Below is a lengthy rant for example, but is itself off-topic/ is only an example, doesn't further discussion, feel free to skip if you don't care:
Marriage is a norm which is religiously sourced (albeit way predating Christianity contrary to politicians and priests) and enforced by the social/economic/governmental spheres, its spirit is the union of persons, their property, and offspring. Currently, people are becoming critical of traditional and/or religiously based definitions of it requiring a mixed sex union. This convention probably held significance in times where cultures had to do everything in their power to make birth rates competitive with death rates due to war, famine, plague, poor hygiene, etc because if they didn't their culture could virtually disappear (this is supported by seeing many cultures without much issue maintaining their population/identity not having as much of an issue with same-sex pairings). That said, it is no longer necessary and is no longer compatible with modernized culture, which results in the growing trend to be critical of the norm because of the desire to maintain its spirit.
Below is a lengthy rant for example, but is itself off-topic/ is only an example, doesn't further discussion, feel free to skip if you don't care:
Marriage is a norm which is religiously sourced (albeit way predating Christianity contrary to politicians and priests) and enforced by the social/economic/governmental spheres, its spirit is the union of persons, their property, and offspring. Currently, people are becoming critical of traditional and/or religiously based definitions of it requiring a mixed sex union. This convention probably held significance in times where cultures had to do everything in their power to make birth rates competitive with death rates due to war, famine, plague, poor hygiene, etc because if they didn't their culture could virtually disappear (this is supported by seeing many cultures without much issue maintaining their population/identity not having as much of an issue with same-sex pairings). That said, it is no longer necessary and is no longer compatible with modernized culture, which results in the growing trend to be critical of the norm because of the desire to maintain its spirit.
This video series is propaganda.
It opens with the phrase "In a wealth-obsessed world...", and that is treated as if it were a fact-beyond-questioning, so that the viewer will accept it as one. That's how propaganda works -- placing ideas into contexts where people will accept them without thinking.
The video goes on to explain that people who live in trash cans, don't use soap, don't take medication, don't wear glasses, don't wear clothes, don't send their children to school and who otherwise don't accept "social conventions" and "conveniences" are happier and freer and better people.
The video explicitly says that the Cynic will be able to successfully "target" the Hater. As if the whole point is to "Hate the Hater" and get revenge. That is perverse and obscene.
IMO, the proper response to hate is sympathy. A sincere goal of understanding the "hater" and taking a non-reactive approach to permit the "hater" to let go of the hate. Hate is (IMO) always based in fear. Fear of loss, fear of isolation, fear of death... To address hate, one has to address those fears, and one cannot do that with snide comments and a smug sense of superiority.
(The charm of The Escapist has always been its unpretentious lack of slick production and the sincerity of its approach to enjoying games, comics, movies et cetera. ZP has always been the oddball in that mix -- a highly successful and highly produced presentation that hopefully helps pay the bills. I can see why The Escapist would want to build a stable of content like ZP, but I ask them to take care not to lose their charm in the pursuit of popularity. This video series utterly lacks charm.)
It opens with the phrase "In a wealth-obsessed world...", and that is treated as if it were a fact-beyond-questioning, so that the viewer will accept it as one. That's how propaganda works -- placing ideas into contexts where people will accept them without thinking.
The video goes on to explain that people who live in trash cans, don't use soap, don't take medication, don't wear glasses, don't wear clothes, don't send their children to school and who otherwise don't accept "social conventions" and "conveniences" are happier and freer and better people.
The video explicitly says that the Cynic will be able to successfully "target" the Hater. As if the whole point is to "Hate the Hater" and get revenge. That is perverse and obscene.
IMO, the proper response to hate is sympathy. A sincere goal of understanding the "hater" and taking a non-reactive approach to permit the "hater" to let go of the hate. Hate is (IMO) always based in fear. Fear of loss, fear of isolation, fear of death... To address hate, one has to address those fears, and one cannot do that with snide comments and a smug sense of superiority.
(The charm of The Escapist has always been its unpretentious lack of slick production and the sincerity of its approach to enjoying games, comics, movies et cetera. ZP has always been the oddball in that mix -- a highly successful and highly produced presentation that hopefully helps pay the bills. I can see why The Escapist would want to build a stable of content like ZP, but I ask them to take care not to lose their charm in the pursuit of popularity. This video series utterly lacks charm.)
I liked your previuos video however this one seems to be just seems, ironically, made by a hater. the video expresses the traits it claims is in accordance to hater but fails at those it claims belong to a cynic. which makes it seem like the video hates itself.
there are plenty of reasons to be a hater though, and many of them are completely valid. Like for example this post.
there are plenty of reasons to be a hater though, and many of them are completely valid. Like for example this post.
Well at least it separates cynicism form hate, etc, etc, its philosophy for dummies. Also it introduces you to Diogenes of Sinope, the guy was a like a super hobo, of course he was a failure, he didn't care and did several controversies.
I'm not a fan of cynicism myself... nor hate.
Anti-Nihilism is the one and only for me.
Btw I can sense the potential of this series for the mean time, for all those philosophy fans.
I'm not a fan of cynicism myself... nor hate.
Anti-Nihilism is the one and only for me.
Btw I can sense the potential of this series for the mean time, for all those philosophy fans.
