🚀 go-pugleaf

On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 20:37:50 +0800, "Arnaud Guillon"
<agui...@magix.com.sg> wrote:

>Just a quick one:
>
>The interactivity in computer game introduces an element of catharsis which
>is often overlooked (for the english-challenged catharsis means
>'purification')

Its also a psychological concept that has generally fallen out of
favour these days.  Think about how riots occur at or in sports games
for instance.  Using a catharsis theory, you wouldnt expect them at
all, would you?

>A psychopath for instance kills or rapes or mutilates for the pleasure that
>he gets, and repeats the act so that the gratification can be obtained again
>and again. Violent computer games, by in a way giving the individual a
>(simulated) outlet for violence, may help him release violence rather than
>increase propensity to violence, as opposed to let s say a book, or a movie,
>or TV, where the individual is passive.

I think you'd have to provide a bit more evidence to convince me about
that one.  

>It is a phenomenon rather similar to burning people in effigy, or using a
>punching ball to relieve stress for instance.

Burning effigies has frequently ended up in riots.  Many people
unfortunately do end up deciding to be violent after rehearsing it
enough times.

>Computer games are often blamed for violence as an over-simplistic way of
>explaining it. The sad truth is that there are many factors that play much
>more of a role in violence: the breakdown of traditional and family values
>and the family cell within modern society for instance.

I agree with the first sentence.  The second doesnt make much sensse
given how long murder has been around.

Think about what the overwhelmingly most common variable of serial
killers is.  I think its more to do with that socialisation issue
myself.

Otara