Posts by Silent Lion

Oh good job. Congarts, man, makes perfect sense to me.

Punishment is a difficult area, because it may be undertaken as a deterrent and an emotional response at the same time, making it very difficult to say 'this is revenge' or 'this is not revenge'. When the state punishes someone through the justice system, that's meant to correct the behaviour (which is why prisons are sometimes called correctional facilities). Except, if that was really the sole intention, why do we always talk about justice for the victim or for the bereaved? Shouldn't it be justice for the victims that might be in the future? Clearly punishing people, even when the state does it, is meant for emotional satisfaction, at least in part. The problem with punishment is that we naturally want it to be right. If someone wrongs us, we want to take revenge, and therefore we will find ways to convince ourselves it's the right thing to do. That's why it took so long to ban corporal punishment from schools - kids can be darned irritating, so hitting them MUST be right. That's a problem with humans in general, we decide what we want to be true, then figure out how to argue that it is. So if you kill a killer, however you choose to put that into words to make it sound right, what's the purpose? What's the effect you hope to have for people's benefit? I mean, you could imprison them instead. There's no evidence to show that there's less murders in countries with the death penalty, so that can't be it.

But there is an argument for punishment too. According to behaviour psychologists, operant conditioning (punishment and reward) can be very effective. But it has to be immediate - which might explain why putting people in prison doesn't work as a punishment, because too much time passes between the crime and the punishment. It also has to be consistent, which is why people who get speeding fines often speed again, because the crime is inconsistently punished. And then there is the issue of long-term effects, especially in children, where children who are physically punished are more likely to become aggressive as adults. http://psychology.about.com/od/behavioralp…introopcond.htm

But the threat of punishment, if consistently maintained over a period of time, can be very effective and long-lasting. One example many of us might be familiar with from school. I was (/am) a submissive geeky kid. Being around me wasn't exactly the place to be, unless you felt sorry for me and wanted to make some kind of point. The response of the males to this was to keep calling me gay (or many other words for the same thing). It was so drilled into me as a negative thing, the idea that if I kept being socially backwards I would somehow become gay or be identified as gay, that it sticks in me even now as something quite threatening. I know, of course, that it's rubbish, but if someone ever asks me anything about my orientation or sexual experiences, I feel quite panicky, and feel desperate to assert my straightness. It's an emotional response - I can control and repress my actions, but I cannot control that emotional response. That to me is an effective display of operant conditioning. I'll wager that you might have similar baggage carried with you from your school days.

There is one huge question left unanswered. If we don't like punishment, what's the alternative? I mean, some people are dangerous, so you need to at least lock them away. And teaching people how to behave ethically - can it really be done without any form of punishment?

I love speed runs. My favourite is this next one. Two completely different approaches, so close.

Ha! Took me a while to get that link, but I get it now.

Missed this thread, didn't I?

So torn over SS. Didn't love the art direction, tbh. It grated on me. I prefer realistic styles, like TP. Even like OoT and MM, in that realistic was the intention and the vibe. I could tolerate WW because at least it was easy on the eyes. But SS can't decide if it's realistic or cartoony, and in the end, it just sort of... grates. It's very blare-y. But I got used to it.

ADORE the controls. I dreamed of motion-control sword action since I was a wee waddler. Am I the only kid who swung sticks around pretending to be Link, and prayed for the day a game like SS would come out? Thought so. Ok, it wasn't 100% realistic swordplay, but it was miles ahead of the cheap excuse for swing controls used in TP. And swordplay aside, I didn't have any problems with the controls. Once you accept them and play for a bit, it all becomes natural.

HATE the world. So empty and boring. The islands were even more sparse than WW, and the overworld consisted of nothing more than scaled-up minigames. The hints of an older civilisation in the desert sparked some interest for me (how does that fit into the Zelda chronology??) but it wasn't nearly enough. Where's the villages, towns, sense of history and culture? I get that it's early on the Hyrule scene, but they just didn't do enough. It seemed to leave RPG behind and verge on platform.

Really like the storyline and how it sets up the rest of the series. Since OoT was my first Zelda game, SS has a lovely full circle feeling to it. Liked the sword-guy's character (forget his name), didn't see that reveal coming. And now aLttP's Vaati, TP's Zant, all fits in. Zelda's character was a little nothing, true. But her identity as a reincarnated goddess opens the door to some intriguing questions/theories, like how she starts as a goddess, then becomes Zelda, the human reincarnation of the goddess, then by WW she's a pirate leader who is a reincarnation of the royal Princess Zelda who is herself a reincarnation of the goddess. So the layers of separation between the character and her original divinity multiply over time - is this the weakening/dispersing of the original divinity, or do the layers of identity solidify through the ages and become permanent, like layers of rock hardened over time?

Also quite like the main theme, but it's not the most mindblowing soundtrack.

I don't mind Skyloft, I really love the idea of riding a bird. My only problem is that the rest of the world is still a primordial nothing place, I'd get so bored. Like, jump off a floating cliff bored. And the ducks are fine - I have a problem trusting the little white cloth. Maybe I'd build myself a big house, seeing as nobody else has built much yet.
What about TP land? Lots of space, plenty of people.

Of all the Zelda worlds, where would you live?

Me, Hyrule from OoT, all the way, maybe in Gerudo Valley or Kokiri Forest. Mostly because it's safe. I mean, it's the only overworld that isn't crawling with enemies. And I can't afford no sword! I like the idea of living in MM's Clock Town, because there's a lot more to it, but then I couldn't step out of the town without being mugged by creepies. Want to visit your buddy in Snowpeak? Oh, just dodge the fire-breathing giant lizards on the way.

I always like me a serious discussion :=_=:

A few questions for everyone, I'd be interested to know.

1) Is there a difference between justice and revenge?

2) Is revenge ok?

3) Does punishment work?

I admit I haven't really given Google+ a fair chance, but I have two immediate problems with it that I'd have to forgive before I used it more.
1) Resource drag and glitchiness. My internet isn't of the new new modern age (translated: it's shit) and even hangouts can take a while to get working for me. Probably related to that is that things glitch a lot or take several tries.
2) It's new.

Both are terrible reasons, because 1) only applies to me and my crappy internet - the resources necessary for google+ are pretty standard havings nowadays, and 2) once again is just because I'm not familiar with it. But then this is why FB has attained a near monopoly, because it does what I want it to do, job done. And you do have some control over who sees what. Buuuuut I do think I should get to know Google+ a little better, it seems to have a lot going for it. Also because I like the Google corporation, so I want it to be better.

But I actually agree with @Cressel - forums are far better for getting to know people. I don't know why, but it always seems a bit odd or awkward to post on FB/Twitter/anywhere else "Hey, [name] - loved your comment on China's censorship policy! Let's be friends!" Maybe it's because SNs are so open and vast. But a forum is a very small number of returning people - it seems natural to get to know people.

Quote from LinkSkywalker

I tend to think the opposite, Silent. I think the violence of the revolution tends to be UNDERstated.

Either you meant OVERstated, or I'm being a verry slow. What did you mean? Wouldn't saying the violence is understated be agreeing with me??

I love the story about Napoleon drinking way too much suicide juice at Waterloo because he thought he was invincible, and because he drank too much he vomited it and survived. It's probably bollocks, but I like the yarn too much to actually find out. But yeah, the Napoleonic Code is quite a liberal one. Napoleon might be history's least nasty dictator.

But in the interest of a good ol' rough and tumble, here are some examples of (mostly) unjustified violence that took place before the Reign of Terror.

14th July 1789 - Vainqueurs de la Bastille

The justification for storming the Bastille is based almost purely on its reputation. The sinister behemoth, with its 14th century military fortifications, the secret building where the guards had to face the wall so as not to see the identity of incoming prisoners, where countless wretches were meant to be languishing in chains in the dungeons.
Well, actually the Bastille was one of Paris' least unpleasant prisons. By many accounts, the food was adequate, prisoners were allowed to bring in their own possessions, and the feared dungeons, far from being full of wretches in chains, had lain unused for years. There was no crowding, there being rarely more than ten inmates. Not long before the attack on the Bastille, there had been discussions about maintaining such an expensive establishment to hold so few prisoners. By spring of 1789 the notion of its demolition was becoming popular, and architects and contractors had began drawing up plans to replace it with a pleasant public square. Especially as at that time its population had dwindled to seven prisoners and none of them were considered particularly dangerous.
So, in the end, despite all the noise about the Bastille being the symbol of an intolerable regime, and the event's legendary status, the whole affair was a pointless exercise of violence. But, on the other hand, it was the mob attacking trained soldiers, so maybe it's not entirely gratuitous.

There's a really neat book by Christopher Hibbert on the French Revolution. Although a little biased in areas, it is half-way between a history and a novel. Since lapping it up five or six years ago, a lot of the historical details have left me. I am left, though, with two lasting impressions. First, it is often romanticised a little too much. Don't get me wrong, it's a really cool part of history, but at all phases of the Revolution there is a little 'liberté, égalité, fraternité' and a lot of gratuitous unjustified (almost random) violence, particularly on the streets of Paris. In the great earthquakes of political revolution, the everyday atrocities of the mob tend to be forgotten (the rapes, the looting etc etc etc). That's what happens when order breaks down and people start to get smug. A necessary purgatory to bring about change? Maybe.

But more importantly, and despite the messy historical reality and its seeming ultimate failure, it DID succeed in altering the psychology of the world. It opened up questions and possibilities that before did not exist or were unthinkable. Many of our modern values stem directly from the events and discussions of that period, and from the many spectators from other countries that brought the romanticised ideals home with them. This is where I think the romanticisation is a good thing - the distortions of storytelling have filtered and forgotten the crud and left us the pure ideals, which in turn have inspired great progress. I think a very similar thing happened with the hippy movement - many documentaries call it an ultimate failure, but I think its spirit and some of its values found their way into society at large. In this way, the ghost of the revolution affected far more than the Revolution itself.

And as an aside, there was a radio series not that long ago about Napoleon, and how he wasn't the complete dickwad everyone seems to think he was. Yes, he was a dictator, which wasn't all that unthinkable for the age, but I think he gets a bad ride. Bare in mind that the people who defeated Napoleon, ruled the world for the next hundred years and got to write all the history books, was us the Brits. And we Brits can be a devious bunch of shits. (poetry on the house)

Quote from Link

It doesn't I was just posting something random.

See the first post; the aim of the game is to defeat the last picture with your picture. So [fire] is beaten by [water] is beaten by [drought] and so on.

I can have a sensitive disposition when it comes to suffering. Creepy suspense films used to freak me out, like The Ring (American version), although if I saw something like that now I'm not sure if it would work. But ideas of suffering seem to work their way into my compulsive and overly vivid imagination. Like in Gears of War and the wife who's been locked in a torture chamber for over a decade. In real life, working in an advanced dementia nursing home got to me for the same reason. Most people just see a vegetable on a bed minding his/her own business. But not me, oh no, I'm busy imagining all the horrible experiences that they're unable to communicate. There was one lady who had a stroke and, whilst maintaining all her consciousness, lost all muscular control and became bedbound. She can't communicate other than vague vocal 'ahhs'. Over years of muscular spasms, her feet have bent themselves forward and downwards. Once, before I worked there, she broke one of the metatarsals in her foot through bad handling. It wasn't noticed until half-way through the next morning's body wash because, well, she moans all night and all day anyway.

So after working a year and a half there, The Ring can go fuck itself.

Hello @Harmon! Welcome.

I was dragged here by Kaynil, btw, via a fateful FB convo.