Saturday, June 02, 2012
The demise of well thought-out arguments
The article was titled 'The Demise of Guys: How video games and porn are ruining a generation". And for the most part, the title captured all of what the rest of it says. We've all seen these "rock and roll is evil" type of articles before. Articles that just reek of an older generation either struggling to come to terms with new developments or (most likely subconsciously) trying to stoke their egos and assert their dominance over the new generation. After all, even I, hardly a quarter-century into the world, have heard friends of a similar age lament about others just a few years younger than us. It's unfortunate that such unnecessary bashing of the young can be right up there with the weather in the list of small talk topics but if even my generation is doing it, I sure can't begrudge the older guys for doing it.
One thing stood out though. P. Zimbardo. The researcher whose new book gave rise to the article. Who coincidently happens to the professor who coordinated the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) Stanford prison experiments. I've also had the privilege to read part of 2 books of his that isn't as popularly known: "The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil" and "Shyness: What It Is, What To Do About It".
The latter was particularly interesting since it was just a read for leisure purpose rather than as research for a philosophy assignment. It was an interesting, academic take on a topic like shyness and really applaud Zimbardo for tackling such a topic though I didn't agree with some parts and eventually stopped short of finishing it after the final parts started to sound more and more Dale Carnegie, self-help-book-like and provided less and less points of critical inquiry. Nevertheless, I was largely impressed with what I've read of Dr. Zimbardo's works and accomplishments.
Which makes it so disappointing he is the one responsible for, full marks for originality, pinning blame on video games and pornography. Perhaps he thought his focus on just guys instead of the entire younger generation will earn him more support. A bit of googling brought up the following TEDtalk given by him on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMJgZ4s2E3w
Sadly, the video only confirmed my opinion after reading the article. I was hoping for a more insightful take on the subject, but there was little. One fact he gave: boys are 5 times more likely than girls to have ADHD. Maybe I'm not up to speed with kids these days, but I think most diagnosis of ADHD occurs before an age where frequent access of pornography and video games start? He gave another story about how guys no longer have the necessary social skills: guys preferring to be at a bar watching the superbowl with strangers rather than make out with a woman. Somehow I felt the story sounds not unlike a group of warriors in a tavern long before the digital age. Other points made in the video are of a similar vein: the causal link between the facts of man struggling and the two activities seem sadly missing.
Maybe there are some gems beneath all the patronizing arguments. Zimbardo talks about "arousal addiction", which may be an interesting concept to study. I'd like to take a look at games/sports and prostitution as well, the two things I feel make good comparison with their digital age counterparts. Ultimately, though, the subject shouldn't be about video games, porn, sports or prostitution. His point about social isolation is probably the more worthwhile idea to ponder about: the extent to which it is happening, whether it is necessarily bad, and ways to improve the situation (if it is bad). It is just unfortunate that such a storied professor thought it necessary to bring such convenient scapegoats to hammer home his points. (Or, heavens forbid, he truly believes those are the true causes of the problems.)
One thing stood out though. P. Zimbardo. The researcher whose new book gave rise to the article. Who coincidently happens to the professor who coordinated the famous (or infamous, depending on your point of view) Stanford prison experiments. I've also had the privilege to read part of 2 books of his that isn't as popularly known: "The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil" and "Shyness: What It Is, What To Do About It".
The latter was particularly interesting since it was just a read for leisure purpose rather than as research for a philosophy assignment. It was an interesting, academic take on a topic like shyness and really applaud Zimbardo for tackling such a topic though I didn't agree with some parts and eventually stopped short of finishing it after the final parts started to sound more and more Dale Carnegie, self-help-book-like and provided less and less points of critical inquiry. Nevertheless, I was largely impressed with what I've read of Dr. Zimbardo's works and accomplishments.
Which makes it so disappointing he is the one responsible for, full marks for originality, pinning blame on video games and pornography. Perhaps he thought his focus on just guys instead of the entire younger generation will earn him more support. A bit of googling brought up the following TEDtalk given by him on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMJgZ4s2E3w
Sadly, the video only confirmed my opinion after reading the article. I was hoping for a more insightful take on the subject, but there was little. One fact he gave: boys are 5 times more likely than girls to have ADHD. Maybe I'm not up to speed with kids these days, but I think most diagnosis of ADHD occurs before an age where frequent access of pornography and video games start? He gave another story about how guys no longer have the necessary social skills: guys preferring to be at a bar watching the superbowl with strangers rather than make out with a woman. Somehow I felt the story sounds not unlike a group of warriors in a tavern long before the digital age. Other points made in the video are of a similar vein: the causal link between the facts of man struggling and the two activities seem sadly missing.
Maybe there are some gems beneath all the patronizing arguments. Zimbardo talks about "arousal addiction", which may be an interesting concept to study. I'd like to take a look at games/sports and prostitution as well, the two things I feel make good comparison with their digital age counterparts. Ultimately, though, the subject shouldn't be about video games, porn, sports or prostitution. His point about social isolation is probably the more worthwhile idea to ponder about: the extent to which it is happening, whether it is necessarily bad, and ways to improve the situation (if it is bad). It is just unfortunate that such a storied professor thought it necessary to bring such convenient scapegoats to hammer home his points. (Or, heavens forbid, he truly believes those are the true causes of the problems.)
