Obama: "Turn off the video games and pick up a book."
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Not sure how you interpreted me indicating that I'm sticking my tongue out at you as smugly superior.Felix said:Wow. I am impressed with how much you misunderstood what I wrote. This has nothing to do with the argument, but because of the smugly superior tone in your response I see no other way than to give you a response in turn.funguy2121 said:The Renaissance. Also known as the Enlightenment. It wasn't the first, either; about two millennia before the time of Leonardo, there were people like Socrates and Aristotle. Though some of the more famous ones (Plato) never actually wrote anything, like the Renaissance, these developments had a pretty decent impact on society. Like the computer, the cell phone, the video games, mathematics, property rights, the concept of freedom, and all sciences. And how did this knowledge spread? Look, if it makes you feel hip and modern, you can read Dostoyevski on a Kindle. As long as you read Dostoyevski. Until you do, you won't make my Christmas listFelix said:
Also, I take issue with your interpretation of those eras/decades. I don't think those are very accurate.
Yes, books aren't new and as you say there was books long before the Renaissance or indeed the middle ages. However, because the vast majority of people alive before the middle ages were completely illiterate, books were of no real importance to the general population. And even if you could read, books were comparatively rare, since all books were written by hand before the printing press was invented in the 15th century.
And I take offence at the notion that I need to "feel hip and modern" because that isn't what this is about. Neither am I opposed to books or reading in general. My query was about the fascination with books over every other media. Shakespeare is a great example. Kids in school are forced to READ his works, even though the man was a playwright.
Also, I take issue with your name. I don't find you very fun guy at all.
The problem isn't that most everyone was illiterate before the Niddle Ages. It was that most everyone was illiterate during the Middle Ages. They are called the Dark Ages for reasons inextricably entwined with ignorance, in a pre-industrial age wherein ignorance was very much tied to illiteracy. The Middle Ages only happened because people were too bloody ignorant to stop it. Before the fall of the Roman Empire, due to philosophy and universities (which involved quite a bit of reading), they had the earliest ideas of Democracy, a much better standard of living, and indoor plumbing. They had numerous things that would disappear for centuries. I don't think the correlation is superficial.
You keep saying that books are somehow glorified. I don't recall books every being a "fascination" for anybody except people who keep every book they've ever read to hold their own imagined superiority over those who get to see their bookshelf and douchebags trying to get laid (the same douchebags who say "Sure, I love the classics, like Casablanca and Good Will Hunting." I'm unsure of the pertinence of your Shakespeare example. It's literature, in a more literal sense than film. And I still don't get how reading too much is supposed to be bad for you, though I've never met anyone who read 10 hours a day.
You can think what you want of me and my name. I must admit, it's the result of a lack of on-the-spot creativity. I figured "funguy" plus an easy-to-remember number wouldn't be taken, and I was right.
Not sure how you interpreted me indicating that I'm sticking my tongue out at you as smugly superior.Felix said:Wow. I am impressed with how much you misunderstood what I wrote. This has nothing to do with the argument, but because of the smugly superior tone in your response I see no other way than to give you a response in turn.funguy2121 said:The Renaissance. Also known as the Enlightenment. It wasn't the first, either; about two millennia before the time of Leonardo, there were people like Socrates and Aristotle. Though some of the more famous ones (Plato) never actually wrote anything, like the Renaissance, these developments had a pretty decent impact on society. Like the computer, the cell phone, the video games, mathematics, property rights, the concept of freedom, and all sciences. And how did this knowledge spread? Look, if it makes you feel hip and modern, you can read Dostoyevski on a Kindle. As long as you read Dostoyevski. Until you do, you won't make my Christmas listFelix said:
Also, I take issue with your interpretation of those eras/decades. I don't think those are very accurate.
Yes, books aren't new and as you say there was books long before the Renaissance or indeed the middle ages. However, because the vast majority of people alive before the middle ages were completely illiterate, books were of no real importance to the general population. And even if you could read, books were comparatively rare, since all books were written by hand before the printing press was invented in the 15th century.
And I take offence at the notion that I need to "feel hip and modern" because that isn't what this is about. Neither am I opposed to books or reading in general. My query was about the fascination with books over every other media. Shakespeare is a great example. Kids in school are forced to READ his works, even though the man was a playwright.
Also, I take issue with your name. I don't find you very fun guy at all.
The problem isn't that most everyone was illiterate before the Niddle Ages. It was that most everyone was illiterate during the Middle Ages. They are called the Dark Ages for reasons inextricably entwined with ignorance, in a pre-industrial age wherein ignorance was very much tied to illiteracy. The Middle Ages only happened because people were too bloody ignorant to stop it. Before the fall of the Roman Empire, due to philosophy and universities (which involved quite a bit of reading), they had the earliest ideas of Democracy, a much better standard of living, and indoor plumbing. They had numerous things that would disappear for centuries. I don't think the correlation is superficial.
You keep saying that books are somehow glorified. I don't recall books every being a "fascination" for anybody except people who keep every book they've ever read to hold their own imagined superiority over those who get to see their bookshelf and douchebags trying to get laid (the same douchebags who say "Sure, I love the classics, like Casablanca and Good Will Hunting." I'm unsure of the pertinence of your Shakespeare example. It's literature, in a more literal sense than film. And I still don't get how reading too much is supposed to be bad for you, though I've never met anyone who read 10 hours a day.
You can think what you want of me and my name. I must admit, it's the result of a lack of on-the-spot creativity. I figured "funguy" plus an easy-to-remember number wouldn't be taken, and I was right.
A valid point, but that does not mean we have to agree with it and we can protest itHaelium said:
And that's all well and good but I'm saying we have the right to choose whether to do so. I'm an 18 year old high school graduate going to an honors program in a college, i have straight A's and I'm in Premed a gamer. I spend a great deal of time on games but i still manage to do what i do. There are more that are successful and are gamers. I do read but only what is required of me. I will say i agree that it should be limited to a certain degree but i think it should be the parents decision and i think they have the right to choose that for themselves.Blitzwing said:
Because drafts of bills, technical papers, engineering documentation, scientific periodicals, and newsprint are not books. Obama qualified it himself.A Gent of Villainous Intent said:
It's not really about games, more to do with parenting.Hamish Durie said:
He suggests that parents read ot their kids rather than have them just sit in front of the computer all day. everything in moderatin and all that.
I spend about 3 hours a day on the train so I tend to read there, sometimes just stare out the window if i'm feeling lazy tho.
Hardly anything controversial.
He's simply encouraging that parents help out young people strike a balance between leisure time and study time, and by using this example acknowledges video games as being one of the primary mediums for - and symbols of - entertainment and fun in this day and age (and books still being the primary medium for - and once again symbol of - learning).
...not that games can't be educational (or text-based for that matter), and books can't be read leisurely, but with the allotted time given by the media there is hardly room for such disclaimers.
He's simply encouraging that parents help out young people strike a balance between leisure time and study time, and by using this example acknowledges video games as being one of the primary mediums for - and symbols of - entertainment and fun in this day and age (and books still being the primary medium for - and once again symbol of - learning).
...not that games can't be educational (or text-based for that matter), and books can't be read leisurely, but with the allotted time given by the media there is hardly room for such disclaimers.
you may have a point....Haelium said:
however its not like some people dont already have an in bulit negative reaction to videogames, worst case scenario some parents may resctrict gaming time (or take away the console all together)
while I feel sorry for whoever that happens too, eather way the rest of us will keep playing
I don't mind Obama at all when it comes to his views on culture. However, from my experience, people who play video games both read more and get higher grades than those who I don't know, play football or something. Although there are those who do not seem to do anything but revise and, props to them, they get the highest grades. Doesn't mean I want to become one of them, I'm happy where I am and would be far more satisfied with everyone if we could all leave eachother to our own devices (withing reason).
I agree, kids should start focusing more on school work and junk instead of trying to pwn people in Call of Duty or whatever. I don't see why people are so defensive I mean it's not like he's sending in the police to start destroying video games and handing out books and shit. I mean, you guys are mature enough to not go "ARGH SCREW YOU OBAMA I'M CONTENT TO SIT HERE AND PLAY VIDEO GAMES FUCK YOU FOR SUGGESTING THAT I DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. FUCK YOU I WON'T DO WHAT YA TELL ME." and shit. If you don't agree, don't get so defensive and keep on playing video games and don't get so offended at the concept of putting down the controls and reading a book.
But some video games actually help me read. For example, the game Company of Heroes made me learn alot about the battles of Normandy following the June 6th invasion. It really helped get me into learning more about the actual battles and units that fought in them.
But some video games actually help me read. For example, the game Company of Heroes made me learn alot about the battles of Normandy following the June 6th invasion. It really helped get me into learning more about the actual battles and units that fought in them.