The Vicious Cycle (Now with Science!)

[Branson Thorne]

There are four lights.

 

Is that a fact, or is that conjecture?

[Desu Nee]

Is this real life?

 

Is this just fantasy?

[Nebbs]

 How does one have the right to play how they want to IF they cannot judge?

 

A right does not require awareness or judgement on the part of the individual wishing to play.

 

It is likely that such derived rights are determined through some means involving judgement, but such a right is not a prerequisite to play.

[Aaron]

Yolo.

 

On a more serious note. You can play how you want and judge at the same time. It's called selective choosing.

 

And reading Verad exquisitely vocab posts makes me feel helluva lot smarter than I should be. Like im reading rare dialect with my 500 IQ.

[Nebbs]

Is this real life?

 

Is this just fantasy?

 

Caught in a landslide...

 

The avalanche has started, it is too late for the pebbles to vote.

.

[No Longer Exists]

I have to confess, I'm not entirely sure what the topic of this thread is. I will say, though, that we're going to be watching it and will lock it if it gets out of hand or starts going... crazy, I guess?

 

To the OP, could you clarify what you're trying to do or what you're asking? I think that'd help get things on track.

 

#magicAdminHat

 

For clarity (and brevity), let's remove the term "roleplay" because I wrote "play" which is an open term. I am speaking SOLELY about the RIGHT to do a thing (example: play) and the statement in response being "Yes, you can (play) but do not judge." 

 

I'll make it a tad more narrow. I have the right to play dodgeball. I am assured that I have the right to play dodgeball the way I want to. I am then told not to judge the game or my fellow players or anyone in the field at the time. If judgement is the way one makes decisions and their decisions are their right, then how can one be expected not to make judgements? Judgements are neither positive nor negative, but can be both.

 

It's illogical, maybe even crazy. I cannot wrap my head around it. So I turned to an off topic discussion for insight and am rewarded with the responses we've seen. It's fascinating.

[Zhavi]

My philosophy professor was very disappointed with my ability to distill arguments into a logical structure. Even after I watched and re-watched this beautiful gem. Still, I really like the idea of some threads with logical arguments in the premise (though I'll admit I don't understand the need for what appears to me to be some obfuscation in the general topic). I like reading them.

[No Longer Exists]

 How does one have the right to play how they want to IF they cannot judge?

 

A right does not require awareness or judgement on the part of the individual wishing to play.

 

It is likely that such derived rights are determined through some means involving judgement, but such a right is not a prerequisite to play.

THANK YOU!

[Brynhilde]

We have the right to play as we wish and we have the right to judge.

 

We have the right to judge, but there is no obligation on the part of others to heed or respect our judgements.

 

That is an excellent point, thank you! I counter with this. If there is no obligation, does one have a right to play as one wishes if they are expected not to judge.

 

I know it sounds cyclical and it will be cyclical, just bear with me.

 

Remember:

 

rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory.

 

 

It's not a cyclical argument if you don't insist on begging the question.

 

1. We have a right to play as we wish.

2. We have the right to judge others for how they play.

3. It is not incumbent upon those who are judged to give a shit about the judgement.

4. That's it.

 

Given that RP is a creative pastime with no governing body, If anyone says, "You have no right to judge my RP!", don't panic; they are not literally seeking your censorship. What they are essentially saying is, "Your take on the entirely subjective matter of what is appropriate in the role-play of this setting does not trump my own."

 

And they're right.

 

I know it can be frustrating when people muddy semantics. But as a philosophy major, take it from me; if you go through life insisting that regular people converse only in terms of crisp, concise philosophical method, you're gonna have a bad time.

[No Longer Exists]

We have the right to play as we wish and we have the right to judge.

 

We have the right to judge, but there is no obligation on the part of others to heed or respect our judgements.

 

That is an excellent point, thank you! I counter with this. If there is no obligation, does one have a right to play as one wishes if they are expected not to judge.

 

I know it sounds cyclical and it will be cyclical, just bear with me.

 

Remember:

 

rights are the fundamental normative rules about what is allowed of people or owed to people, according to some legal system, social convention, or ethical theory.

 

 

It's not a cyclical argument if you don't insist on begging the question.

 

1. We have a right to play as we wish.

2. We have the right to judge others for how they play.

3. It is not incumbent upon those who are judged to give a shit about the judgement.

4. That's it.

 

Given that RP is a creative pastime with no governing body, If anyone says, "You have no right to judge my RP!", don't panic; they are not literally seeking your censorship. What they are essentially saying is, "Your take on the entirely subjective matter of what is appropriate in the role-play of this setting does not trump my own."

 

And they're right.

 

I know it can be frustrating when people muddy semantics. But as a philosophy major, take it from me; if you go through life insisting that regular people converse only in terms of crisp, concise philosophical method, you're gonna have a bad time.

 

Tis the murkiest of subjects and I thought an engaging row in crisp, concise method might be interesting, something different from the general opinions. Nudge the mind to think in different terms and maybe something new would spring up.

[Kage]

I am very very confused.

 

For your dodgeball example. Is it in a difference in play -style-? As in, people don't like that you always catch the ball thrown at you. Or you always dodge it? They can't fault you for it. They may not like it but that is up to them. You only put as much weight into their judgment in so far as how much you care about what they think.

 

Or is it because you have a different idea on what the rules are?

 

Considering dodgeball is a team sport, the teams decide before the match what kind of rules they will play by. There is a set of rules in place.

[No Longer Exists]

My philosophy professor was very disappointed with my ability to distill arguments into a logical structure.  Even after I watched and re-watched this beautiful gem.  Still, I really like the idea of some threads with logical arguments in the premise (though I'll admit I don't understand the need for what appears to me to be some obfuscation in the general topic).  I like reading them.

 

I missed your post there for awhile, but I'm gonna give that link some attention. Thanks!

[No Longer Exists]

I am very very confused.

 

For your dodgeball example. Is it in a difference in play -style-? As in, people don't like that you always catch the ball thrown at you. Or you always dodge it? They can't fault you for it. They may not like it but that is up to them. You only put as much weight into their judgment in so far as how much you care about what they think.

 

Or is it because you have a different idea on what the rules are?

 

Considering dodgeball is a team sport, the teams decide before the match what kind of rules they will play by. There is a set of rules in place.

Exactly, Kage.

[FreelanceWizard]

Final warning: I've seen some posts that blatantly violate the rules in this thread, and warnings have been delivered.

 

It does not matter whether you like the content of a thread or not. It is patently unacceptable to take an aggressive tone against those posting it. Didn't we just have a thread about not doing that exact thing?

 

#magicAdminHat

[Nebbs]

 How does one have the right to play how they want to IF they cannot judge?

 

A right does not require awareness or judgement on the part of the individual wishing to play.

 

It is likely that such derived rights are determined through some means involving judgement, but such a right is not a prerequisite to play.

THANK YOU!

 

Did I win? As a winner I demand my right to cake! 

 

http://wanna-joke.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/funny-picture-eat-icecream-dont-judge.jpg[/img]

[Edvyn]

the erpford institute of roleplayology welcomes you with open arms, esteemed fellow professor of the imaginary fun times. indeed, you do present a bamboozling conundrum! how can people judge things if the judgist cannot judge in the conjecture argumentation defined factually logic dictates that we, using the scientific method, philosophy emotions reiterated thus; 1. an empirically systematic deduction process theory, 2. rectal methane expulsions, when combined with dihydrogen monoxide in liquid form, are colloquially understood to be called "wet farts"

 

therefore, ye olde roelplayeth :?

[Flashhelix]

judge dredd?

[FreelanceWizard]

I think we're done here. If people would like to have a more reasoned discussion about this on a new topic, I'd recommend giving it a few days for tempers to cool off.

 

Thread locked.