How to overcome guilt in military simulation

[26-J39]

your feelings make no sense at all.

 

Ultimately, guilt is often one of the most nonsensical emotions

 

 

Lol um, are you human? :huh:

[KLR Rico]

I don't know if killing people makes someone into a warrior, or if it's someone born a warrior that aspires to do that job.

 

I had an Apache pilot friend who expressed zero reservations about sending people to meet their maker, and talked about it openly.

 

I've often considered going green to fly helicopters, but always back down from the idea for one reason or another. I do know that I don't particularly like the idea of ending human lives, and I'd much rather be flying medivac.

 

As far as "killing" in simulation, I have no guilt whatsoever. I feel there's a pretty distinct difference between 1's and 0's, and flesh and blood.

[aaron886]

Geez, Swift, if you really feel that way then just stop. It's just pixels. If it bothers you, why do it?

[Eight Ball]

At first I found Swift's reaction extremely strange and thought I could never experience that but then I thought about maturin example of a Holocaust RTS.

 

I admit, if it was free, I would try it. Just to see howfar they went.

In this case I know I would feel terribly bad enjoying such a game.

It wouldn't be because of the action I'd make in the game but it would be insulting towards the memories of people who actually lived the holocaust.

 

That's also why I never eat while watching the news on TV.

I don't want to find myself eating a pizza looking at people getting killed.

It's disrespectfull in my opinion. I have no problem with graphic footage, I just want to look at them at the proper time.

 

Violence defines us, as human being, as much as love do. Maybe even more.

Animals are capable of loving too but they aren't violent, at least not in the way human beings can be.

 

(That said, I believe that a frontline soldier who is truly without guilt, conscious or unconscious is medically abnormal and something of a monster.)

This reminded me something A.Huxley wrote about mental illness :

 

“The real hopeless victims of mental illness are to be found among those who appear to be most normal.

"Many of them are normal because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence,

because their human voice has been silenced so early in their lives, that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does.

" They are normal not in what may be called the absolute sense of the word; they are normal only in relation to a profoundly abnormal society.

Their perfect adjustment to that abnormal society is a measure of their mental sickness.

These millions of abnormally normal people, living without fuss in a society to which, if they were fully human beings, they ought not to be adjusted.”

 

Even after all this years this is one of the most meaningful thing I've ever read.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Eight Ball

[leafer]

I think it boils down to where and how you were raised. I grew up in a 3rd world country and I have no problem seeing dead bodies on the streets in a pool of blood. In fact I was quite fascinated by it when I was much, much younger. I'd be surprised if Swift grew up in a ghetto.

[danilop]

...

 

Violence defines us, as human being, as much as love do. Maybe even more.

Animals are capable of loving too but they aren't violent, at least not in the way human beings can be.

...

 

 

This is so true, and we tend to very easily forget about that. :thumbup:

 

That's the reason why violent entertainment is selling so well and make masses happy - Romans patented it, and modern game industry took it to every corner of the Earth - "Panem et Circenses " - Bread and Games. So yes, in general, we are happy:

 

1) when our bellies are full

2) when sexually satisfied

3) when entertained with violent content.

 

:lol:

[26-J39]

This is so true, and we tend to very easily forget about that. :thumbup:

 

That's the reason why violent entertainment is selling so well and make masses happy - Romans patented it, and modern game industry took it to every corner of the Earth - "Panem et Circenses " - Bread and Games. So yes, in general, we are happy:

 

1) when our bellies are full

2) when sexually satisfied

3) when entertained with violent content.

 

:lol:

 

What a load of rubbish!! ;)

 

If this were true we'd all be running around killing eachother for fun.. We fight when we feel the need to, just like any animal.

 

Behavior is a result of the environment, humans are not violent "by nature".

 

:)

[Kuky]

What a load of rubbish!! ;)

 

If this were true we'd all be running around killing eachother for fun.. We fight when we feel the need to, just like any animal.

 

Behavior is a result of the environment, humans are not violent "by nature".

 

:)

 

You need to take off those rose-coloured glasses as lot of people are sure as hell violent by nature and "we" don't just fight when we need to, lot of times people fight because of greed, fame, entertainment... you name it :music_whistling:

Edited January 12, 2013 by Kuky

[Manuel]

I think you can consider the human nature as one, that is broken in terms of acting in a way which is not congruent with what the nature truly is or better: should be. Mankind has a lot of names for it: Sin, bad karma, whatever. But you have to see the tendency to bad habit because of the reasons kuky named. If nobody would act in these bad habits, no security would be necessary and no war machinery. All would be peace and joy or whatever. Point is, it isn't that way and we have to deal with that.

[Rotorhead]

What a load of rubbish!! ;)

 

If this were true we'd all be running around killing eachother for fun.. We fight when we feel the need to, just like any animal.

 

Behavior is a result of the environment, humans are not violent "by nature".

 

:)

 

You will be surprised, but human is a kind of animal, too. And animals are violent by nature. Not that they kill for enjoyment, but all of them do for survival.

 

Animals kill their prey for food, animals fight their predators for defense. There are no crocodiles who reject to kill zebras, because as every lifeform, they want to survive and they have to kill to survive.

 

Humans once weren't different. They killed for food, they killed in defense, they even killed each other for their territory, their women, their fire etc... Rejecting to do that would be highly irrational, because... you would die.

 

After long evolution, people became more "civilized" and "detached" from the rest of the nature. They haven't had to fight for their living on daily basis anymore, so they have mostly supressed this part of their nature. Once irrational behavior has became a norm.

 

But there are still fragments of this violent nature left in humans. If they werent, there would be no wars, no violent games and movies sold, and no police and jails for those who still don't understand that killing and hurting other people does not have any place in today's society.

[Pilotasso]

We havent abandoned violence as a means of survival, Be it fisical or psichological. We still compete with each other even if its only for favouritism at work, ultimatly for better salaries in order to accumulate goods and to atract women, and we still fight for resources. Nothing changed, only the methods.

[Madone]

It's gonna be a long debate! If you feel sad for the virtual guys dying in the bmp, then stop playing military for a moment, maybe it will go away from your mind as fast as it came. You're supposed to be happy when playing a sim lol so if you're not do something else and don't force yourself.

Also I don't think you need medical help, that's not illness to feel sad for peoples dying.

[docfu]

When I was a kid, my parents never got angry at me for blowing up tie fighters because "the empire was bad."

 

However, ironically, they had a lot of complaints about Doom at first because of the satanic symbols, never mind that you are the one KILLING the demons...

 

Even then, they never had any problems when Tie Fighter came out...and I started shooting rebels instead.

 

(What can I say? The empire had better dental care...)

 

Lately, however, I have a similar feeling, but it's more or less that rather than playing a simulation and pretending, I should be doing something that actually makes a difference in the world. There are people risking their lives to help people in Africa or North Korea, and I just sit around playing a simulator pretending to blow stuff up.

 

There's nothing wrong with playing a game where you simulate war. The fact that maybe simulations like these can help people develop a moral conscious in the long run makes them worth while. Sure we all start off as kids thinking "shoot the bad guys, win" but as we grow older we come to see the real colors of these situations, to truly understand, even if it is "just a video game" that real people matter and have value, a value that can't be replaced by a machine.

 

I think the biggest moment I had that keeps me playing was when I tried to fly a SU-25 mission with NO LABELS and I realized...my god...it really is impossible for me to tell, even on a high res screen, if that's a friendly or enemy tank using just the SHKVAL.

 

Yet there are pilots who fly with that equipment every day, fight wars with it, and live with the stress that every time they pull the trigger, they might be making the mistake that ends not only their career, but the lives of their fellow troops.

 

That's not a stress I could live with, and I'm grateful that I was able to learn it from something that's "just a video game."

 

And so I fly, and the more realistic these simulators get, the more colorful they become.

 

...

 

And in the darkness I have lost my way....and gained a conscious as a result.

[Eight Ball]

What a load of rubbish!! ;)

 

If this were true we'd all be running around killing eachother for fun.. We fight when we feel the need to, just like any animal.

 

Behavior is a result of the environment, humans are not violent "by nature".

 

:)

Like others have said we have set a serie of rules to prevent us from killing each other every day. The simple fact that we had to set those rules shows we are violent by nature.

 

Of course that's not how we like to define ourselves. We prefer to define ourselves as capable of love, empathy, complex thought process, etc

But the fact is we share that with many other animals.

The only one unique thing human being have over all the other animals is his ability to be violent when he wants to.

 

There is no counterpart to torture in the animal world. No murder, no genocide, no racism no hate. Only humans are capable of that.

 

And the holocaust show us that even in our "civilized" society you don't need much to let free the worst part of us.

 

You could argue that we know violence is bad. That's not true. We had to learn it. Good or bad isn't a natural law like gravity.

It's a human notion that only applies to us and we weren't born knowing it. That's, like you said, where the environment plays his role.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Eight Ball

[Headspace]

Hobbes vs. Locke discussion up in this thread.

[danilop]

What a load of rubbish!! ;)

 

Behavior is a result of the environment, humans are not violent "by nature".

 

:)

 

Are yo aware that Nazis had the most developed society at the time - culturally, economically, scientifically, industrially ... the best "environment" possible

 

And sadistic,cold and calculated violence still happened.

 

Think about it! ;)

[sobek]

Are yo aware that Nazis had the most developed society at the time - culturally, economically, scientifically, industrially ... the best "environment" possible

 

That is weapons grade baloneyum.

 

The Nazi regime was based upon exclusion of certain "impure" (or however they would define it in their doctrine) groups of humans as well as oppression and fear. Violence didn't just "happen" in the regime, it was instrumentalized, just as was fear of denunciation.

 

Culture can never thrive fully in a regime that is oppressive, in fact, while certain artists were raised for being loyal to the regime, those that weren't faced forced labor or death. So please, do us all a favor and get a clue. ;)

 

Edit: Oh and btw., godwined. :doh:

Edited January 12, 2013 by sobek

[mmaruda]

It has been proven numerous times by anthropologists and psychologists that humans are not violent by nature. There are primitive societies in the Amazon jungle, or in Polynesia that do not know violence (no murder, no fighting, no stealing). It's a cultural thing and since most popular culture comes from the US, we have grown accustomed to the concept that humans are highly competitive and individualistic race, because those are "American values". But that is just not true - in the basic, close to nature tribal societies, cooperation and unity is the normal way to go. I never get how in American movies, when there is a killer hunting a group of best friends, it's suddenly every man for himself and they turn on each other. Nobody ever criticises that in US reviews, but in my country most people consider it stupid.

 

It's the media that accustoms us to violence. Movies, news, dumb reality shows. During WWI most British soldiers, though in a war, had difficulty pulling the trigger with an enemy in their sights. So what the army did, was they replaced round target mark in training with human shaped ones, to accustom soldiers with the concept of killing another person. And it worked. An now? We don't even wonder on the concept of killing in a war any more. There used to be anti-war movies, with a pacifist approach, now it's all about the coolnes of killing.

 

I mean look, when WWII ended the German and Japanese war criminals were sent to trial. They did horrible things, yet they still got a fair trial. Now, people actually celebrate killing of Bin Laden. I'm not saying he did not have it coming, but noone opened up champagne bottles after the Nuremberg trial, if it was so important that the WWII war criminals stand trial, so that it would be perceived as justice not retaliation, what changed in our way of thinking? Why are we fed the pulp that killing and brutalising people is acceptable under some conditions more than say 50 years ago?

 

Personally I like to think of humanity as wonderful species, capable of achieving anything, going into space, creating beautiful art, or selfless sacrifice. Saying that we are violent by nature is just denying the responsibility of our societies for their members' violent behaviour.

[danilop]

It has been proven numerous times by anthropologists and psychologists that humans are not violent by nature.

 

Well Neanderthals, as a first victim of total genocide performed by Homo Sapiens, probably wouldn't agree with those theories.

 

There are primitive societies in the Amazon jungle, or in Polynesia that do not know violence (no murder, no fighting, no stealing).

 

No competition for resources, no violence.

 

It's a cultural thing and since most popular culture comes from the US, we have grown accustomed to the concept that humans are highly competitive and individualistic race, because those are "American values". But that is just not true - in the basic, close to nature tribal societies, cooperation and unity is the normal way to go. I never get how in American movies, when there is a killer hunting a group of best friends, it's suddenly every man for himself and they turn on each other. Nobody ever criticises that in US reviews, but in my country most people consider it stupid.

 

No it's not cultural thing, it's competition thing and every possible society from Cro Magnons onward used violence. Check your History books. Tribal fairy tale is possible in remote places where there are no other tribes around. Read the history of the animosities between first Nations in America and methods they used in war, for example (no I'm not American, and I'm not the biggest fan of modern pop-culture either)

 

It's the media that accustoms us to violence. Movies, news, dumb reality shows. During WWI most British soldiers, though in a war, had difficulty pulling the trigger with an enemy in their sights. So what the army did, was they replaced round target mark in training with human shaped ones, to accustom soldiers with the concept of killing another person. And it worked. An now? We don't even wonder on the concept of killing in a war any more. There used to be anti-war movies, with a pacifist approach, now it's all about the coolnes of killing.

 

Again, read the history. Hellenic and Roman in this regard. Sparta, etc ... nothing new in WWI really ...

 

I mean look, when WWII ended the German and Japanese war criminals were sent to trial. They did horrible things, yet they still got a fair trial. Now, people actually celebrate killing of Bin Laden. I'm not saying he did not have it coming, but noone opened up champagne bottles after the Nuremberg trial, if it was so important that the WWII war criminals stand trial, so that it would be perceived as justice not retaliation, what changed in our way of thinking? Why are we fed the pulp that killing and brutalising people is acceptable under some conditions more than say 50 years ago?

 

Now we are talking cultural thing. IMHO (according to my cultural beliefs), I think that victims of the atrocities performed by terrorists have full right to celebrate the death of the mastermind behind it.

 

Personally I like to think of humanity as wonderful species, capable of achieving anything, going into space, creating beautiful art, or selfless sacrifice.

 

Me too. However, that is our bright side. There is the dark side too.

 

Saying that we are violent by nature is just denying the responsibility of our societies for their members' violent behaviour.

 

No, denying the fact is just a recipe to let the history repeat itself. We have laws and punishment/rehabilitation for those members of society who couldn't control their urges. Violent criminals need to be punished accordingly and separated from society for certain period of time.

 

:beer:

Edited January 12, 2013 by danilop

[Rotorhead]

Personally I like to think of humanity as wonderful species, capable of achieving anything, going into space, creating beautiful art, or selfless sacrifice. Saying that we are violent by nature is just denying the responsibility of our societies for their members' violent behaviour.

 

No, it's not. As long as you can tell good from evil, you cannot apologize murder by saying "It's not my fault, I am violent by nature." That's what you have you conscience for. But that does not mean that there are no violent tendencies left in us.

 

Humans used to be predators, they had to be violent to survive. It's still part of their nature. But their intelligence and conscience are another parts of it. As human society developed, they have realized that it's better to use their brains instead of fists, and they will benefit more from cooperation than from fighting each other. That it's good to protect the weaker, to help their wounded fellows, which in turn helps their society to be bigger and stronger.

 

It's up to our society, and especially up to each and every one of us, to decide which part of our nature we want to use. I think that every sensible person, unless driven into desperate situation, should pick the non violent path. But some just don't...

 

And when talking about going into space, it's known that biggest progres of space technology took place during the cold war. Why? Because of competition between USSR and USA. Both of them tried to be the best, the first... You see? Another kind of fight. A non-violent one, but still a fight. People are born to compete. But they should be enough intelligent to do it in a non violent way, and to know where to stop.

[Rotorhead]

And one more thing.

 

I love when people say that violence is caused by culture, or even better, by violent movies or video games. Not that I am fond of these, but:

 

Most of the killing and violence took place in ages where no movies or games were available. Today, some people feel sorry for a mass murderer, because he gets arrested for the rest of his life. In medieval ages, they used to cut thieves' hands off or to burn witches with no regrets. I think they had to watch very bad movies to be that senseless.

 

Or, I always wondered which video games young Hitler used to play that he grew into such monster...

 

Seriously, I'm not saying that we are not affected by our culture. Same people would behave very differently in different cultures, ages, or even different situations.

 

All I wanted to point out is that not everything is as straightforward as some people claim. It's easy to say "Video games are making our kids violent", but where are the real reasons of todays violence? Are the parents raising their kids in a good way? Do the world leaders give a good example to the rest of us? Is our society healty as a whole? There's always a bunch of reasons behind everything not just a single easy one.

[Eight Ball]

It hasn't been proven mmaruda, there isn't any consensus on that subject.

I used to read a lot of anthropology books and the one I liked the most was about a tribe called Guayaki in the amazon.

 

Within the tribe there were no violence. But they could be extremely violent with other tribes that they judged as savages. They had war over territories, they were stealing women, killing men and children wihtout any afterthought because they considered themselves as the only "human".

 

Unfortunately I don't share your enthusiasm about our species. In my opinion the sooner we'll disapear the better it will be for any form of life on this planet.

 

I'm also in awe in front of many technological achievment but for me it doesn't outweight in any way all the horrible things we're capable of.

You talk about space but the entire space program was based upon the control of the space in order to attack other countries.

The very first step of the space program started during WWII with the german rocket V2.

Funny how Von Braun and other nazis scientifics never had been charged with anything and later help the US with their space program.

Look for "Operation Paperclip", it will probably change the way you think we somehow had higher value back then.

 

Our selfishness and arrogance as "the top species" is something I can't stand.

Like I said, the sooner we'll get rid of ourselves the better for "everyone else".

 

EDIT: that's completely offtopic but that's society faults, not mine :P

Edited January 12, 2013 by Eight Ball

[sobek]

Like I said, the sooner we'll get rid of ourselves the better for "everyone else".

 

Playing devils advocate here, so when carrying that thought out a bit further towards the ultimate conclusion, why are you still alive? The sentiment of your post sounds rather suicidal (not that i'd want to plant that thought in your head). ;)

[danilop]

 

Unfortunately I don't share your enthusiasm about our species. In my opinion the sooner we'll disapear the better it will be for any form of life on this planet.

 

....

 

 

Pop-culture? yes! But Smith has a point! :megalol::megalol::megalol:

[Eight Ball]

lol don't worry Sobek I never thought about suicide.

It's not because I don't highly value our species that I'm not enjoying my life. I'm not cocky enough to think that killing myself will change anything in the world.

 

You could ask me why I don't join Greenpeace and Co. Simply because I don't think we're capable of any changes before hitting the wall.

 

James Cameron made a parabol I liked a lot about the titanic and our society.

The Titanic was described as unsinkable. It was just too big to fail.

The problem was it was too big, too heavy and too fast.

It was building so much momentum it couldn't turn properly and this leaded to the disaster we all know.

 

In the same way our society is too big and too fast.

The economical and political momentum prevent us from turning and avoid the iceberg in front of us.

 

How is it going to end ? I don't know but you understood I was not really optimistic ;)

 

Pop-culture? yes! But Smith has a point!

:D long before Matrix I already considered us as viruses

:)

Edited January 12, 2013 by Eight Ball