R/banvideogames Community Members' Immature Behavior And Thinking
Introduction
The internet is a vast and diverse space, home to countless communities and forums dedicated to every conceivable topic. Among these is the subreddit r/banvideogames, a community that, as the name suggests, advocates for the banning of video games. While the existence of such a forum is not inherently problematic, the rhetoric and behavior exhibited by some of its members often raise eyebrows. In my opinion, a significant portion of the r/banvideogames community engages in arguments and discussions that resemble the kind of logic and reasoning one might expect from children. This isn't to say that all members of the subreddit are immature, but the prevailing atmosphere often reflects a lack of critical thinking, reliance on hyperbole, and an overall simplistic understanding of complex issues surrounding video games and their impact on society. This article will delve into the reasons why I believe this to be the case, examining the common arguments, the tone of discussions, and the general approach to the topic within the r/banvideogames community.
Video game discussions often become heated, and the r/banvideogames subreddit is no exception. The core issue stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of the medium itself. Many members seem to view video games as inherently evil, addictive, and solely responsible for a wide range of societal problems, from violence to declining academic performance. This black-and-white perspective is a hallmark of immature thinking. Children often struggle with nuance and are prone to seeing things in extremes. They may latch onto a single negative aspect of something and allow it to overshadow any potential benefits or complexities. This is precisely what we see in r/banvideogames. The focus is almost exclusively on the perceived negative consequences of video games, with little to no acknowledgement of their potential positive aspects, such as improving cognitive skills, fostering creativity, or providing social connection. The arguments often presented are simplistic and lack supporting evidence. Claims are made about the direct correlation between video game violence and real-world violence, despite numerous studies that have failed to establish such a causal link. This reliance on anecdotal evidence and emotional appeals, rather than empirical data and logical reasoning, further supports the notion that the discourse within the community often mirrors that of children. The use of hyperbolic language is also prevalent. Video games are frequently described as "mind-altering drugs" or "instruments of the devil," exaggerations that betray a lack of critical thinking and an inability to engage in a rational discussion. Such inflammatory rhetoric is more akin to a playground argument than a serious debate about the role of video games in society.
The Prevalence of Logical Fallacies
Another key indicator of the childlike nature of arguments within r/banvideogames is the frequent use of logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are flaws in reasoning that render an argument invalid. Children, due to their limited cognitive development and lack of experience in critical thinking, are more prone to committing these fallacies. In r/banvideogames, several fallacies are particularly common, including straw man arguments, ad hominem attacks, and appeals to emotion. Understanding these fallacies and their prevalence within the community is crucial to understanding why the discourse often resembles that of children.
One of the most common logical fallacies encountered in r/banvideogames is the straw man argument. A straw man argument involves misrepresenting an opponent's position in order to make it easier to attack. Instead of engaging with the actual arguments made by gamers or video game enthusiasts, members of r/banvideogames often construct a distorted version of their views. For example, they might argue that gamers believe that video games are completely harmless and have no negative consequences whatsoever. This is a gross oversimplification of the pro-gaming stance, which typically acknowledges potential risks but emphasizes the benefits and the importance of moderation. By attacking this fabricated position, rather than the real one, members of r/banvideogames avoid having to engage with the complexities of the issue. This is a tactic often employed by children who lack the intellectual capacity to engage in a nuanced debate. They resort to misrepresenting their opponent's views because it is easier than addressing the actual arguments. Ad hominem attacks are another common feature of discussions in r/banvideogames. An ad hominem attack involves attacking the person making the argument, rather than the argument itself. Instead of addressing the points raised by gamers or video game developers, members of r/banvideogames may resort to personal insults or character assassination. They might label gamers as
