This essay will describe why, and examine the evidence given in the two chosen articles on video games, and violent behavior. I will provide the evidence given in these articles and, I will decide which article, I believe creates a stronger argument. Moreover, in my opinion, I plan on arguing the stronger article, and giving examples from both articles. Nonetheless, I will identify any logic fallacies that exist in both articles and explain what makes them logic fallacies. The articles that I chose goes as follow: Proposed “Violence in Video Games Labeling Act” Centered around logical fallacy. The second article is Playing Games with Violence. I would like to start by describing what logic fallacies consist of: Logical Fallacies is roughly …show more content…
My first article Proposed “Violence in Video games Labeling Act “Centered around Logical Fallacy, seemed to have the stronger argument than the article, Playing games with Violence. The reason the first article seems stronger, because of the factual evident that the representatives from California presented to the consumers. The first representative from Oklahoma William Fourkiller tried to increase video games by a 1% tax increase on all video violent or non-violent, which clearly was in my opinion, considered unconstitutional. Therefore, Baca, and Wolf, California Representatives decided to intitiate the same concept, except they did it in a more political matter. Moreover, from a non-game perspective, it seems pretty harmless even from a gamer perspective, it’s not likely to change your life one way or another. Nonetheless, failing to treat it with respect it deserves a respect that film, music, and literature all enjoy. So, therefore, the logical fallacies in both of these articles, in my opinion was deception. In California the representatives use software to entice the consumer by selling the software with the intent on raising the 1% tax anyway. Whereas, the representatives in Oklahoma just straight out wanted to increase video games violent or non-violent which, I believe the consumers’ would have not engaged in buying any of his video games. And, the article playing video games with violence tried to link bad behavior while playing this game. The logical fallacies in this article also, displayed deception. The study that was conducted never found any hard factual evident that playing video games lead to violent behavior, so the people of Pennsylvania could were mislead by the State Government Commission’s Advisory Committee on Violence Prevention. In my opinion, I also, believe that if a person already have a violent behavior playing video games
Many People have put their attention directly on the influence violent video games have on the bad behavior of children. People believe videogames intensify aggression in children, while others say it can be a safe getaway for a child to express his aggression. Many opinions on this issue are stated still today, and they remain divided amongst the people who claim videogames to be a cause of aggression and those who claim otherwise. A child’s behavior can not be determined by violent video games, but instead is caused by a variety of environmental and domestic factors. It is easy to blame video games on violence, instead of looking at factors such as economic status, familial issues, and exposure to other entities such as television and media. This paper will bring forward the opinions of those who believe in no relationship between violent video games and bad behavior with one counter argument expressing the opinion of those who believe there is a relationship.
Since the 1970 video games have become more popular than ever before. Generating 11.7 billions of dollars of sells every year or more, the video game industry is considered one of the largest industries in this century. However, video games have been a topic of controversy. With the sales of violent video games going up and the increased violence in schools and teenagers, video games are always to blame. Many people speculate that video games are the cause on why many teenagers have developed aggressive and violent behavior, are desensitize to violence, and the increase violence in schools and public places. In contradiction, video games have little or no fault in teenagers’ violent behavior and shouldn’t always be blamed.
One would be hard-pressed to find a household without any video gaming devices. In fact, over eighty percent of American households some sort of gaming device. On top of all that, violent video games have surged in popularity, occupying over 50% of the 30 top video games sold in 2015 (Kain). In light of recent mass shootings, video games are routinely accused as the culprit that influences one to violence. Researchers all over the world have tried to establish a causal relationship between video games and violence. Some researchers have come to the conclusion that video games, specifically violent ones, spark aggression. However, other researchers have come up with the opposite conclusion, that the studies that portray video games as detrimental
Fallacies, in terms of logic, are forms of flawed thinking. They are obstacles—weeds in the garden of the mind, which can be difficult to distinguish from the plants if not closely observed. The nature of fallacies falls in with our nature as human beings—they do not like to be discovered and plucked any more than we like to be the ones to admit that we are incorrect. Accepting responsibility for our actions, and in this case fallacies in our thinking, is the first step to change. Thus, if we can overcome our human pride and admit our flaws to ourselves, we are then empowered to correct them. Therein lies the value of examining these fallacies, which is an important component of studying critical thinking.
Video games have gotten a lot of negative attention in the media as a scapegoat for what is wrong with children. Are video games really as bad as they are made out to be? Alice Park, writer of “Little By Little, Violent Video Games Make Us More Aggressive” published on time.com, believes that video games are making people more aggressive. But within her article there are many flaws with her arguments; it makes a poor attempt to blame video games for events like the columbine shooting, racism, and hostile behavior. Park makes poor unsupported claims about the quantity and quality of games being played by children and the effects these games are having on them.
Whether violent media content leads to real-life violence is always debatable. And in recent years, school shootings have made video games a new focus of public concern and scientific research. In public opinion, video games cause more aggression in comparison to traditional violent media contents because video games have more features of interactivity, "due to the active engagement and participation of players" (Hummer and Wang et al. 137). But more and more reports tell us that video games are not the main cause of school shooting issues; rather it is the negligence of parents, schools, and communities.
Do modern video games contribute to the increasing level of violence that we see around us? Can we really attribute the shootings and bombings we see on the news to the increased violence and realism of video games? Every day, people are exposed to violence through the TV shows and movies they watch, the video games they play, and national media networks who bombard us with graphic information portraying violent and hard-hitting global events. To top it all off, the media frequently loves to make outrageous claims that video games either “inspired” or “trained” the culprits of many of these violent acts. In the article “Are Violent Video Games Harmful?,” Guy Porter and Vladan Starcevic claim that “while playing video games outwardly appears to be an innocuous activity, the limited data available suggest playing violent video games may be related to aggressive and/or antisocial behavior” (4). I strongly disagree with their statement; not only do I believe that violent video games do not directly cause aggression, but I also feel that gaming is a very social activity that is commonplace among today’s youth.
A fallacy is defined as a failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid, faulty reasoning, or a misleading or unsound argument. There are many kinds of fallacies and even websites devoted to describing the various kinds of logical fallacies. Fallacies, though, are slippery little fiends, which do not hesitate to creep in even where they are unwanted. No one wants their argument proved false, but careful, critical readers can spot these shifty deceivers. On the website of the Center for American Progress, there is an article – authored by Catherine Brown and Ulrich Boser – called “The DeVos Family Dynasty.” This article is a poor example of persuasive communication because there are many cases of ad hominem fallacy, the authors repeatedly
Fallacies Fallacies are common errors in reasoning that will undermine the reasoning of your argument. Fallacies have different types like Begging the Claim, Ad hominem, Straw Man and more. and are often identified because they lack evidence that supports their claim. A writer or speaker should avoid these common fallacies in their arguments and watch for them in the arguments of others. Learning to identify and avoid fallacies is crucial for professionals in all fields of life, literature, science, politics, etc.
Many people believe violence in video games result in violent outbreaks and unhealthy behavior in real world. Since the first Nineteen Eighties, violence in video games became a part of a political issue leading advocates to create theories that these styles of games are corrupting society. Studies have been created to seek out if there's a link between violent video games and violent behavior. Are these video games shaping today’s generation of youths to be violent? I believe that there's no correlation between violence in video games and violence in our society. I think this first of all, improves a large form of general skills, secondly, there are several alternative factors that contribute into creating society violent and finally, crime rates decrease because the quality of those forms of games increase.
During the first week of class we discussed informal fallacies. An informal fallacy is defined as a logical mistake. Five of the informal fallacies discussed were equivocation, ad hominem, straw man, appeal to authority, and secundum. Each of these fallacies are comparable to what happens in everyday life conversations. Through analyzing, one should be able to determine how these fallacies connect with our everyday lives.
Playing video games does not cause violent behavior. Don’t get me wrong, some video games show horrific acts of violence. “A recent survey found that 92 percent of U.S. kids--ages 2 to 17--play video games, and their parents bought 225 million of them last year to the tune of $6.4 billion.” (Sider 79).What’s here to argue is that violent video games do not cause violence among children, but the blame for violence should be on the individual and people who should have taught the individual better. If kids are not able to see the difference between reality and fantasy, then they really can’t be blamed for committing acts they see in a game and then imitating, not fully understanding the consequences of doing it in the real world. Parents should be the overall deciders of what they want their children playing, watching, and doing. Being left with the right to raise their child in their fashion, parents should find out what the child is playing and limit or restrict them, so then parents can’t blame anything on video games if their kid commits a violent act. With video games as the new part of our pop culture, many adults find it hard to understand why children would want to spend so much time playing with these “idiot boxes”. With this lack of understanding comes fear, for, as humans, we fear what we do not know. So all that will come of this cycle is people will continue to play video games, something new in our pop culture will come and replace video games, and it will be radical for our pop culture and taken on as the root of all evil due to lack of understanding.
Although violent video games are thought to encourage real world violence, they actually help to prevent it. I am focusing on violent video games and how they affect juveniles because I feel that this issue needs to be looked at in the criminal justice community. It is an unnecessary distraction to blame the actions of a disturbed youth on a form of entertainment that has been used by millions of people without incident. A review article published in The Psychiatric Quarterly found that many studies which claim to indicate an increase in aggression due to video games are, in fact, biased! Once the bias is taken into account, the studies no longer find any correlation between youths who play violent video games and youths who demonstate aggression and violent behavior. (Ferguson, 2014)
“Contrary to the claims that violent video games are linked to aggressive assaults and homicides, no evidence was found to suggest that this medium was a major (or minor) contributing cause of violence in the United States.” (Markey, 290)
In the 2014 editorial, “Do Violent Video Games Contribute to Youth Violence?”, Steven Markoff supports the claim violent video games cause violent behavior. He speaks to a curious audience of all ages. The article uses logos throughout creating a set opinion on the topic.