Player vs Player and game

If i say something then that must be existing somewhere, because i am existing.

ajqtrz wrote: asr wrote: Everything is possible in our minds but where the info is coming what we manipulate as we like, its coming from a place what has its own rules and viewpoint. Actually not everything is possible in our minds.  Language is limited and if you've ever done any translation work you know that concepts don't always translate without loss.  Lee Whorf and  Edward Sapir argue that every language shapes the culture in which it's used and that some things which can be thought in some languages do not have the necessary constructions in another to be thought in that language.  We are, if the gentlemen are right, limited by our linguistic vocabulary. If by "but where the info is coming what we manipulate as we like," you mean that we receive data or stimulus from some place and manipulate or organize it into some cohesive reality, I agree.  However, that does not mean our manipulation does not actually reflect reality.  At each level of understanding we find that whatever symbolic representation we use to reflect or describe or experience reality, much is lost.  Reality is complex and with billions of pieces of information in each and every second.  We choose by perceived significance where to focus and thus structure our understanding.  As we interact with others we respond to their experiences and opinions and learn from them to pay attention to what is significant not only to our survival but also to the survival of our cultural or social group. And if you mean when you say, "its coming from a place what has its own rules and viewpoint" I would say that it's not totally subjective but a balance of the subjective, inter-subjective and objective dimension of knowledge. In other words we don't live alone and there is something outside our veil of sensory experience.

Edited by asr - 26 Feb 2016 at 00:40

asr wrote: aj, There were a book of pictures with different reactions. All types are real. But if you play out of the character then it feels like pretending then suddenly we tell its fake. So if we agree that its all fake what we do then we name it theater. So in a theater if you remind too much your real personality then you are fake. What is a game? we agree that its created and acted. Its made of real stuff and real people are playing it. something in my body decides what is true, false or what is real. what is true doesn't have to be logical, what is false doesn't have to be unreal.

Yes and no.  Good acting can fool us or nobody would be the victim of scam artists.  Thus, even if we are spectators, it may be that we can't tell the difference...for instance, do you think the players who oppose me are just plying a character when they write in the forums?  When they get frustrated with me?  They are real people responding to real ideas and arguments.  And what about GC?  When the express their displeasure in GC is the displeasure being experienced by a real person or not?  Thus, when they express themselves they are expressing the emotions and thoughts of a real person.  And when they act in the game it's a real person acting.  The problem is that you don't know them face to face or even their legal name, so you put psychological distance between them and yourself and then use that psychological distance to enact things you wouldn't do if you knew them.

We are in the play.  And if it's unscripted we are not told what "roles" the others are playing?  Is it possible, therefore, for players to just play themselves?  The evidence that a person takes their personality into an unscripted environment, in acting and in on-line gaming is pretty clear.  Friends can usually recognize off line friends even when those off line friends are given "roles" to enact and told to pretend to be those roles.  And the longer the session the more accurate the players get in recognizing which of their friends were playing which roles.

So we agree that the player is present in the game.  We agree that what is done in the game, therefore, may, for good or ill, effect the player.  If that is true then it follows that we need to apply real world ethics to the situation.  Real world ethics do say you can play a thief.  They say you can play at war.  But they also say that you should not be required to play a thief or have war thrust upon you without cause or necessity.

AJ