GoldenSilence33 Posted July 20, 2011 Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 Basically my question is if there is an objectivist justification for playing video games. I can't see Howard Roark, Henry Rearden, Dagny Taggart, or any Rand giants gaming. Roark said the meaning of life is your work. Wouldn't this be contrary to gaming? I'm very curious as to your replies, as I am a casual gamer and I see myself as somewhat of an Objectivist. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volco Posted July 20, 2011 Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 This is what Ayn Rand thought of sublimatory activities like playing games (when the proper purpose of life is sublimated, replaced with something that emulates the purpose. only in some cases that is a good thing). http://www.chesskb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/chess-politics/2771/Ayn-Rand-s-Letter-to-Boris-Spassky-Bobby-Fisher And this is what Ayn Rand thinked of other hobbies, in her case, collecting stamps from non communist countries. http://thedabbler-blog.blogspot.com/2010/08/keys-cupboard-ayn-rand-why-she-liked.html and http://facetsofaynrand.com/book/chap2-stamp_collecting.html I can relate to that. For instance, playing Civilization is fun for me, is to an extent a value, but I know I am procrastinating (unless I'm the one building the scenarios, or otherwise tinkering with it). While when I "play" with sketchup completing one building a day of my imaginary city, I feel somewhat accomplished. Other than that, remember that search app up there is a newb's best friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JASKN Posted July 20, 2011 Report Share Posted July 20, 2011 Objectivism as a philosophy doesn't say anything about gaming as such. It will only tell you how to judge gaming within the context of your own life. Is the activity benefitting you or not? Why, or why not? That sort of thing. You would have to use the philosophic principles for yourself and apply them to the activity of gaming. Among some things you might consider might be: how much do you enjoy gaming, ie. how important is it to you? What kinds of values do gain from it (is it just a temporary distraction from other activity, or do you enjoy the social aspects, also?)? Is the rest of your life "in order?" Rather, is your life organized how you need it to be in order to enjoy gaming at the level which you would like to enjoy it? While Objectivism does say something about the nature of existence, how one acquires knowledge, what general types of requirements are needed to live a happy life, and many other subjects directly related to broad life principles, for something as specific as gaming, you'll have to use those broad principles and figure it out as related to your own life, goals, needs, wants, and so on. 2046 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptnChan Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 The nature of gaming has changed and is changing very much. It has become a very accesible form of entertainment. Ayn Rand loved entertainment. She fell in love with America by watching movies. She watched TV. Video games are a modern form on entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapitalistSwine Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 First thing to do is not to attempt to come up with answers based on whether or not you feel these fictional and/or non-fictional characters would participate in these activities, it asks the wrong question entirely and therefore you will get incorrect answers much of the time because it means you are thinking about this the wrong way. That, plus JASKN's answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volco Posted July 21, 2011 Report Share Posted July 21, 2011 First thing to do is not to attempt to come up with answers based on whether or not you feel these fictional and/or non-fictional characters would participate in these activities, it asks the wrong question entirely and therefore you will get incorrect answers much of the time because it means you are thinking about this the wrong way. That, plus JASKN's answer. While I fundamentally agree with you on the subject of the matter I disagree on basing answers on Rand's fictional characters. She insisted we (students) took her novels as the foundation of her philosophy. The point here is that I do imagine many of the characters in the novels doings a substitute of what would be gaming. Howard Roark is described as spending long periods of time doing nothing, waiting. I don't mean at the quary while working, I mean at his office smoking waiting for clients. Surely he sketched, but obviously on his own terms, not constantly, he is portrayed as relaxed enjoying the view (which I couldn't relate more). In Atlas Shrugged both Eddie and Dagny are first presented in moments of "free time" and introspection, and movement. What if Dagny had been playing on her iphone while thinking on the train. That said, I still remind everybody of what Ayn Rand said of the dangers to the self of excessive sublimation, and what is symptomatic of, as stated in her open letter to Boris Spassky. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.