Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:42 PM
- I've had the same discussion with kittenz as well btw LUUL
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:46 PM
- if psychology was an interest of yours, you'd have a different opinion.
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:47 PM
- nnnope I actually based my arguments on a philosophical construct
- I agree on you that, given the same basis on good and bad, you can tell objectively wether overwatch is good or bad
- but some might see some arguments as not bad or not as bad and the other way around
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:50 PM
- that comes down to how well the argument is constructed and how critical the person you tell it to is about what they take serious or not.
- if someone has done something for longer than someone else, and does it better, that persons opinion immediately becomes more credible, especially if that person does not have a financial incentive to go against their principles.
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:51 PM
- there is a saying: "objectively my objectivity is not objective"
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:51 PM
- that saying is referring to the problem of semantics
- and if you make it into an issue of semantics, then saying that anything is "objective" or "subjective" is erroneous
- because as far as relativity is concerned; everything IS or ISN'T. Nothing inbetween.
- but for everything else, opinions encompass both objectivity and subjectivity, based on what you say
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:53 PM
- good and bad is a more complex structure than is or isn't tho
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:53 PM
- for example, I would take atomicus' opinion on overwatch over seagull's opinion on overwatch
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:54 PM
- on the quality of the game?
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:54 PM
- yes
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:54 PM
- but the thing I'm saying is, the defintion of the quality of the game differenciates from person to person
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:55 PM
- so does everything, and if you valued every single opinion the same way, then you would never be able to formulate an opinion of your own
- because you'd get too much misinformation from all directions
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:55 PM
- the concept of quality defines a collective of characteristics about an object, but this collective isn't the same for every person
- that's why you say what a good game is before you say wether something is a good game or not
- and that goes with everything
- you predefine the space your opinion is pointed at
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:57 PM
- yes, because you can assume that everyone comprehends the basic framework of what someone is trying to accomplish with a specific product
- like an FPS game
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:57 PM
- I'm not saying you should do that before saying in chat that the game is bad or anything, don't get me wrong LUUL
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:57 PM
- example; someone might be attracted to broken noses
- but having a broken nose is still objectively bad, because it makes it harder to breathe
- and based on the framework on human anatomy
- I can say that having a broken nose is bad
- and ALSO unattractive
- that doesn't make it any less credible
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:58 PM
- it could be objectively good as well, because it means that you are a boxer maybe and you are strong and can survive
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:58 PM
- because it's not equivocal
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:58 PM
- and that makes it also attractive again
- I actually know someone who likes people with scars for exactly that reason
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:59 PM
- it's not objectively good if it doesn't work properly
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 10:59 PM
- it might look less appealing to you but to others it's a sign of strength
- Mixie - Yesterday at 10:59 PM
- not within the confines of it's own framework
- if breaking your nose gets you a better job
- then that makes it objectively good, INDIRECTLY
- but it's consequential
- Mixie - Yesterday at 11:00 PM
- the broken nose, in itself, is still bad
- the financial incentive that blizzard have of overwatch, means that they will try to promote it as a good game
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 11:00 PM
- yes, within that definition, and that's exactly what I wanted to say
- Mixie - Yesterday at 11:00 PM
- and that goes with people who play it too
- Bobbeldibob - Yesterday at 11:00 PM
- or framework as you call it
- Mixie - Yesterday at 11:00 PM
- because some people don't want to admit that they paid money for something bad
- that's part of basic human psychology
- no one wants to admit they made a bad purchase
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement