Choice, or Dilemma?
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
12-20-2011, 01:36 AM
What I'm seeing from most of this is the idea that because "bad" is subjective, my argument fails.
I'll concede that bad is subjective, but I do not concede that it cripples my argument.
Torture, is almost universally considered to be a bad thing, yet there are those (masochists) who would
being tortured. That it
be enjoyed, that is, can be a "good" thing
for a few
does not make torture
a good thing, or even an "ok" thing, especially not when if it were to be foisted upon those who don't enjoy it.
I will admit there are a select few for whom grinding the same content is an enjoyable activity, but I would reserve the right to say that it's fair to say the majority does not.
I will admit there are a select few for whom forking over real-world currency is an acceptable way to gain advantage and enjoyment in the game, but I would reserve the right to say that it's fair to say the majority does not share that feeling.
I will admit there are a select few for whom not playing game is a perfectly acceptable option, but I would reserve the right to say that it's fair to say the majority does not find that a desirable option.
A few well-defined exceptions do not cripple an argument.
One of the real questions is, is there anybody out there for whom all three exceptions apply?
The reason I ask is, if I make a poisonous cocktail of arsenic, cyanide, and ricin, and I have three Lab Mice and (for the sake of argumentation) each one has been made immune to one of the poisons, can it be said, because of the specific mice, that the cocktail is safe for mice?
We are not given each option in a vacuum, we
choose one of the three, and simply because
of us may be content with one or even two of the options, does not make all the options good ones.