TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Something that annoys me...

Go To

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#101: May 26th 2012 at 2:17:50 AM

The article on Enders Game was interesting. I disagree with some of the points (Ender wiping out the species being wrong in this case), but still an interesting look at what makes it popular.

Fight smart, not fair.
TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
#102: May 27th 2012 at 5:09:55 AM

[up][up]Which Hume in particular are we talking about? Because in Britain, there are many Humes. That family, and its branches, bred like rabbits and a lot of them are prominenten. You have philosphers and prime ministers with that name, for example.

DoktorvonEurotrash Lex et Veritas from Not a place of honour (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#105: May 27th 2012 at 6:22:08 PM

That article was annoying. It was basically a giant strawman argument. It goes on and on about how intentions are not the ultimate arbiter of morality, but fails to mention what is, and then ends on a note saying "oh, by the way, what I really meant is that intentions form a large part of morality, just not all of it". Which is pretty much exactly what Card's writing suggests — people hold Ender responsible for the xenocide even though he didn't intend it. Ender holds himself responsible for the xenocide even though he didn't intend it. The author doesn't actually seem to disagree with Card, despite writing an article about how wrong Card is.

edited 27th May '12 6:22:27 PM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#106: May 28th 2012 at 12:54:30 AM

[up]You're not familiar with the standard deeds/intentions dispute over good works, then? The article's complaint is that Card massively weights the scale towards intent, to the point where we're often supposed to muster more sympathy for the guy who obliterated a species than for his victims. It's kind of like the old fandom concept of manpain.

What's precedent ever done for us?
Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#107: May 28th 2012 at 2:28:22 AM

As Ender was the main character, isn't that the point or something? Eh, it's a Bug War where the bugs attacked first. I don't consider Ender to have acted in a way that was morally wrong at any particular points. Then again, I don't consider self defense to have scalar limits.

Fight smart, not fair.
Iaculus Pronounced YAK-you-luss from England Since: May, 2010
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
#108: May 28th 2012 at 3:42:29 AM

As Ender was the main character, isn't that the point or something? Eh, it's a Bug War where the bugs attacked first. I don't consider Ender to have acted in a way that was morally wrong at any particular points. Then again, I don't consider self defense to have scalar limits.

Are you familiar with the concept of a What the Hell, Hero? moment, or a Villain Protagonist? It is quite possible for the protagonist of a story to commit terrible actions that we aren't supposed to sympathise with. The problem with Card is that there is little, if any room in his writing for people to be wrong or mistaken - good intentions result in good, and evil intentions result in evil. There is no place for the Knight Templar or Well-Intentioned Extremist there. In the real world, meanwhile, a good number of history's worst mass-murderers earnestly thought they were doing the right thing.

What's precedent ever done for us?
Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#109: May 28th 2012 at 4:13:21 AM

It's even worse than that, actually. Despite their murdering, they actually did do some good. Medical technology would be stunted compared to what it is now without the horrific experiments done by the dictators of the 20th century. A lot of the technology we have now would be back in its infancy, if it even existed, without a great war to spur it on. Heck, this very internet was formed to keep the military connected while it fought enemies. Germany was still in a Depression until the Nazis temporarily turned things around for the war effort (too many people, not enough jobs, suddenly mobilization breaks out and more people can find jobs again). Life's not black and white, it's a sliding scale of grays.

TotemicHero No longer a forum herald from the next level Since: Dec, 2009
No longer a forum herald
#110: May 28th 2012 at 6:05:26 AM

Funnily enough, that point comes up in the later Ender books, since the ansible used by the military to coordinate their attack fleets becomes the primary method of communication among the various colony worlds. It's not like Card is ignorant of history, after all.

Either way, I've kind of grown tired of the Ender controversy...or at least this controversy. I'd be more concerned about all the people who identify themselves as the Enders of the world, the intelligent outsiders. That is a bit more problematic.

Either way, I prefer the early Alvin Maker books anyway, they're better written. A shame he took too long between them and the later ones; continuity issues abound. sad

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#111: May 28th 2012 at 1:33:14 PM

You're not familiar with the standard deeds/intentions dispute over good works, then?
No, I am. The article just doesn't really mention that, though — it argues against intention-based morality without really mentioning any alternative. (Besides, you could make utilitarian arguments that what Ender did was good as well — if killing the [relatively small number of] queens makes the [relatively large number of] humans really, really happy, then that outweighs the buggers' unhappiness at being xenocided.) I find that arguments against something without an argument in support of an alternative are generally unconvincing.

The article's complaint is that Card massively weights the scale towards intent, to the point where we're often supposed to muster more sympathy for the guy who obliterated a species than for his victims.
I'm with Deboss on this one. Ender's Game isn't about the buggers — it's about Ender. I feel like this point would be more relevant if Ender did something like, for example, deciding not to help revive the buggers because he'd suffered enough already and didn't want to add to his burdens. The fact that he goes out of his way to atone for his xenocide suggests both that a) he does consider himself guilty of the xenocide (otherwise it wouldn't require atonement) and b) he's not focused more on his own pain than on that of the buggers.

edited 28th May '12 1:33:23 PM by NativeJovian

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Albor Since: Mar, 2011
#112: May 28th 2012 at 6:07:51 PM

So... there isn't anyone on this forum who agrees with OSC?

It's odd that a view that passes the popular vote often enough has very little pressence on the internet.

Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#113: May 28th 2012 at 6:27:09 PM

One has to wonder what percentage of the population even votes on the matter, and what percentage thinks it's a foregone conclusion and are actually shocked at the real outcome in the end. Then one has to wonder what percentage of those who voted the way OSC thinks actually use internet forums at all. People posting on forums are probably another minority in the population, to be honest.

ChocolateCotton Xkcd Since: Dec, 2010
#114: May 28th 2012 at 6:27:16 PM

[up][up] One might make the observation that OSC's views are predominantly shared by the older crowd, and the internet is most commonly frequented by younger people. Gross generalizations, yes, but it would explain the general trend.

edited 28th May '12 6:27:26 PM by ChocolateCotton

Albor Since: Mar, 2011
#115: May 28th 2012 at 6:39:53 PM

Perhaps you need to be on a political or theological forum or sommething. Or maybe those that do simply avoid such disscussions because they knowe how passionatly some people oppose them.

It really is not a good sign for me.

edited 28th May '12 6:40:25 PM by Albor

Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#116: May 28th 2012 at 6:48:03 PM

I don't think this is actually a popular opinion anymore at all, it's just that the very vocal minorities really do vote more consistently than the rest of us, because they're afraid of being pushed aside. Course, all us voting would do is speed up what's already happening. Those minorities will fade out as badly the Nazis did. (They might do rallies but they have very little real political power.)

Jhimmibhob Since: Dec, 2010
#117: May 28th 2012 at 6:48:54 PM

[up]There are probably also Tropers who'd agree with some of Card's beliefs, but not all of them. Some might agree with several of his conclusions, but have more serious arguments than Card marshals, and lack his nasty, hostile edge.

For my part, I'm against legalizing soi-disant "gay marriage," and believe that institutions like the Catholic Church have non-trivial, reasonably persuasive (though not irrefutable) arguments against the morality of homosexuality. Nonetheless, if vice it be, it's not one that I really lose any sleep over, or feel moved to go on rants or crusades against. So I'm not sure that qualifies me as "agreeing" with Card in any meaningful sense.

edited 28th May '12 6:51:28 PM by Jhimmibhob

ChocolateCotton Xkcd Since: Dec, 2010
#118: May 28th 2012 at 6:58:50 PM

I don't think this is actually a popular opinion anymore at all, it's just that the very vocal minorities really do vote more consistently than the rest of us, because they're afraid of being pushed aside. Course, all us voting would do is speed up what's already happening. Those minorities will fade out as badly the Nazis did. (They might do rallies but they have very little real political power.)

I've heard/read on several occasions that support for gay marriage is more common among the younger generations, and that as more and more teens reach voting age (and more and more of the older generations who oppose gay marriage die), majority opinion among voters is beginning to shift.

Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#119: May 28th 2012 at 6:59:32 PM

I think the big argument for gay marriage is reducing religion to a personal choice. Right now it really doesn't matter what religion you are, Christianity pretty much has a firm pulse on the nation's government. Giving the same exact rights to same sex couples as to opposite sex ones reduces the influence of an organization that has no right to legislate the morals of the populace. If you want to follow them, that's entirely up to you, but our government, being secular, and not really allowed to be beholden to a religious institution, should not be following the dictates of one when it comes to governing the country's social scene.

Most of the practical problems with homosexuality have been mitigated by science. Children can still be born to them without someone having to bite the bullet and have sex with someone who repulses them. It might be more expensive in some cases, but that in itself just boosts parts of the economy. If folks like Card would stop ranting against the matter, there'd be fewer safety issues as well.

ChocolateCotton Xkcd Since: Dec, 2010
#120: May 28th 2012 at 7:12:36 PM

Most of the practical problems with homosexuality have been mitigated by science. Children can still be born to them without someone having to bite the bullet and have sex with someone who repulses them.

Add to that the fact that sterile heterosexual couples and heterosexual couples who choose not to have children are still allowed to marry without their relationships being questioned/outlawed.

LoniJay from Australia Since: Dec, 2009 Relationship Status: Pining for the fjords
#121: May 28th 2012 at 7:56:08 PM

I don't think turning this thread into one about gay marriage is a good idea... if you want to discuss that we have like 4 threads in OTC.

Back to the original topic... If I were only allowed to read books by people who agreed with me, my reading pool would be very small indeed. Most authors are going to disagree with you on something in the political/religious/bigotry spectrum.

Be not afraid...
Jhimmibhob Since: Dec, 2010
#122: May 28th 2012 at 8:00:23 PM

[up]What she said. If you can't compartmentalize just a little bit, and take an author's works for what the works themselves are worth, you'll end up with a very parochial reading list indeed.

Deboss I see the Awesomeness. from Awesomeville Texas Since: Aug, 2009
I see the Awesomeness.
#123: May 29th 2012 at 12:38:49 AM

I'm familiar with the concept of moral greys in a story, I just didn't feel that the Ender series had them in the first few books. The later ones did, particularly the debates later on.

Fight smart, not fair.
Journeyman Overlording the Underworld from On a throne in a vault overlooking the Wasteland Since: Nov, 2010
Overlording the Underworld
#124: May 29th 2012 at 4:55:03 AM

The only times an author's political stances would stop me from reading would be if the author goes in for long political tracts within his/her works, which would slow down and kill the flow of the story, or if I found out that part of the money I'm giving to that author by buying the book was going to some group actually trying to make the person's sick dreams come true. The proceeds from John Ringo's Paladin of Shadows series (Which is nothing more than wank fic) actually go to helping out women who were/are victims of the sex trade (This one's good). If I found out another author I read was donating his/her money to helping out third world dictators, or to the campaign finances of a politician who would wreck his/her home country for profit, I'd boycott in a heartbeat.

Nohbody "In distress", my ass. from Somewhere in Dixie Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Mu
"In distress", my ass.
#125: May 29th 2012 at 5:07:43 AM

In regards to Paladin of Shadows, it's not book sales going to the Helen Bamber Foundation, but sales of a shirt bearing an illustration (well, sorta) of one scene with the caption "OH JOHN RINGO NO!". (The Cafe Press store for the shirt was closed at the end of 2009 due to interest tapering off, after raising 700-odd bucks for the Foundation.)

All your safe space are belong to Trump

Total posts: 141
Top