Games Are No Cause For Murder
An anonymous reader writes "At Gamers With Jobs, Shawn Andrich speaks out against pointing the finger at videogames as a causative factor in a murder cases. He makes the excellent point that, though we may enjoy the metaphor, life is not a game. There is no simple connection between event A and event B. Our actions are dictated by experiences from a lifetime, and they should be addressed that way for good or ill. 'Life can't be framed up like a game of billiards. There is no easy eight ball, corner pocket shot to be made when trying to draw a line between cause and action ... Lasting, positive change will only come when we stop reaching for causes and start creating conditions that will support kids and teenagers who need it. We can't make anyone put the pin back in the grenade, but by supporting active, caring people who want to help, we might be able to influence some of those fateful decisions before it gets that far.'" GamePolitics on Joystiq has an editorial up looking at a similar question.
Not that it will be anything worth while, but that's never stopped him before.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
from the article "Getting mired in the minutia of cause and effect keeps us in a constant cycle of fear and blame. It's an utter waste of time."
straight, to the point, and in my opinion very accurate. kudos for this one!
I am shocked that more people don't make the connection that: of course the murderer kid played violent video games... s/he was a violent person! If those games "made" people violent, then wouldn't there be a direct correlation between when a new game is released and some huge spike in murder statistics, where the new murderers mostly also owned the game?
stuff |
Oh, and am I the only one who's tired of the old, "I'm a gamer and I'm not violent so obviously games don't contribute to violence," gem being busted out time and time again, as if its actual proof?
When dealing in absolutes, yes, it does constitute a valid (dis)proof.
To prove causation, you must show the precondition as both necessary and sufficient. If I play violent games and haven't killed someone, you can't say that playing violent games cause murders (without any qualifiers).
Now, that doesn't disprove the idea that playing violent games may apply another CCW turn to some people's screws. But that means a whole world of difference, putting "violent games" in the same ballpark as "pain", "alcohol" (or other drugs), "a good scare", "isolation", "Military experience", and "divorce".
I decided to run the Jack Thompson Translation software on the first comment from TFA...See the results below. Comments in italics, translations are not.
Just off the top of my head, benefits I've gotten from gaming
1. Faster, more accurate typing skills (for dodging bullets)
2. better reading comprehension (so I know who to shoot)
3. Sharpened Problem solving skills (when the gun doesn't work, switch to the knife)
4. Computer and Programming knowledge (old aimbots didn't install themselves you know!)
5. Experience using CAD like programs (to make maps of my school of course)
6. better hand eye coordination (the better to shoot you with my dearie!)
-
I had a good signature until format c:
I don't know. I've played some games that made me want to kill...the developer of the game.