Not enough Magic TV shows ... everything is mutants now a days

[Anonymouswizard]

Well let me assure that making a post that disagrees with what most people believe magic is defined as and mutant is defined as will get you lots of flack. So what you think they are really doesn't matter even if you SAY what you think they are in the original post for clarity you'll still get the same stuff.

Now I would say that defining mutant as "they have them, and it's defining" could be applied to green lantern, Dr. Strange, psionics, and many other things that people here define as "magic". On the flip side "supernatural power that isn't defined" could cover many of the mutants as well. I mean look at the development of Xavier, they never really defined his power other than "mental" and they change it from mind reading, to mind control, and expand and contract it as they see fit for the story that's currently happening.

Actually, I done Vogie's definitions perfectly fine, because they're generic. Is have used a different term for mutant, I call it the 'gifted/wizard distinction' myself, but it's a great definition that doesn't randomly exclude a lot of wizards because it's not like D&D.

I sorry you find what I enjoy depressing. Maybe you should move along to another thread which shares your vision of how the world should be and no one brings up any opposing views rather than ridiculing mine?

It's not your views I done depressing, it's your definition of magic (and I like disagreement, if I didn't why world I be on this thread?). Every attempt we make to say 'magic has many different systems, sometimes within the same work' is shut down.

Plus I need to get a copy of Day Watch.

[Coveny]

It's not your views I done depressing, it's your definition of magic (and I like disagreement, if I didn't why world I be on this thread?). Every attempt we make to say 'magic has many different systems, sometimes within the same work' is shut down.

I post a thread and say I want to talk about how blue skies are beautiful, and every time you try to tell me all skies matter I shut you down. Not getting to talk about what you want to talk about has got to be hard for you...

[2D8HP]

Well I'm 45....

. I'm old, and this is the way I think of magic....

You're not that old, and in the words of the 1976 Dungeons & Dragons supplement that my first DM used:

Eldrich Wizardry

If "Magic" isn't "fulfilling the original premise of danger, excitement, and un-
certainty", it's not magic at all.

If souls aren't devoured or reality endangered, it's mere engineering.

*Yawn*.

We don't need no education.

Magic is bargains with unearthly horrors!

Some dude knowing what recipe with bat guano as an ingredient to make a Fireball is not magic!

Magic is the "treasure house" in:

Two Sought Adventure/The Jewels in the Forest by Fritz Leiber.

Magic is the fate of the sorcerer Yara in:

1933's The Tower of the Elephant by Robert E. Howard,

and Magic is the fate of those who looked inside the Ark of the Covenant in 1981's Raiders of the Lost Ark.

[Knaight]

I post a thread and say I want to talk about how blue skies are beautiful, and every time you try to tell me all skies matter I shut you down. Not getting to talk about what you want to talk about has got to be hard for you...

It's more like you post a thread to talk about the sky, and then it turns out that by the sky you mean a tiny cone formed by going out one degree from a line going straight up at the north pole. You then wildly theorize about an entirely different section of sky based on that tiny, tiny segment you're looking at, and start complaining about being misinterpreted when people point out that you're working with insufficient data.

[2D8HP]

To expand a bit on what I've posted earlier in this thread, the problem I have with both academic "magic" and "mutant powers" is when they're risk free and (as described in this thread) like reliable tools without any uncanniness.

Boring!

Needs more danger.

The OP mentioned The Magicians, the practice of which (in the books at least) does a involve uncanny danger.

If the practice of magic involves no risk to the caster or to at least the casters concience and is instead a boring "superpower"...



.....even Star Trek's teleporter was more interesting than that ("Mirror", "Mirror", etc.)!

I already cited Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell as a work that gets magic right, but another recent (21st century) work that starts out good is A Darker Shade of Magic in that magic itself has it's own agenda (like Stormbringer did in the Elric series), unfortunately the sequels devolved to D&D like "caster fights", but still it was a good start.

Keep magic a little more Call of Cthullu (or better still Stormbringer) and less D&D please.

Take 1958's The 7th Voyage of Sinbad in which Sokurah the magician is crushed by hus own Dragon, 1973's Golden Voyage of Sinbad and how working spells visible ages Koura, or 1977's Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger and how Zenobia winds up with a gulls foot.

That's the right way!

The wrong way?

2012's The Avengers (admittedly I just didn't watch all of it), just so very boring (how did it become so popular?).

If the story is "someone with superpowers is super" I'll give it a miss.

Reward without risk is just too dull!

Another example of "done right" should be familiar to most:

The consequences of Vaarsuvius "Soul Splice" spell, and bargain with the IFCC.

Now that's what I'm talking 'bout!

[Anonymouswizard]

I post a thread and say I want to talk about how blue skies are beautiful, and every time you try to tell me all skies matter I shut you down. Not getting to talk about what you want to talk about has got to be hard for you...

Well...

It's more like you post a thread to talk about the sky, and then it turns out that by the sky you mean a tiny cone formed by going out one degree from a line going straight up at the north pole. You then wildly theorize about an entirely different section of sky based on that tiny, tiny segment you're looking at, and start complaining about being misinterpreted when people point out that you're working with insufficient data.

Don't forget that he originally posted about a third bit of sky you can see if you turn exactly one radian clockwise from where you see the cone he described, and still brings that section up occasionally to say that that's the kind of sky he wants.

[Knaight]

Don't forget that he originally posted about a third bit of sky you can see if you turn exactly one radian clockwise from where you see the cone he described, and still brings that section up occasionally to say that that's the kind of sky he wants.

Also there was the part where he talked about how Millennials were all lazy because when they stargazed they looked at the wrong section of sky.

[Anonymouswizard]

Also there was the part where he talked about how Millennials were all lazy because when they stargazed they looked at the wrong section of sky.

Please, it was more like complaining us Millennials watch clouds drift by instead of stargazing, at least according to him. It's not our fault if we want to watch clouds at night.

[Cheesegear]

I like stars. But, really, I only like a specific constellation, in one particular area of sky. Are there any other stars like the ones I like?
Not really. I mean, it's a specific area of sky that nobody really likes where you are. If you want similar constellations, you may have to look at another bit of sky.
No. I mean, why aren't there other constellations like the one I like, within my area of sky?
Because there aren't.
You're not getting it. I like those constellations, and there should be more of them!
We're telling you that those constellations kind of exist, you just have to look elsewhere.
No.
Alternatively, you may just have to accept that whoever made the stars, in particular constellations and patterns, didn't make them for you, they made them for everyone,
and maybe whoever created the stars is seeking out the highest audience for what they made. Rather than the niche thing that you like. Almost like, for every person that likes that constellation, there are like, 50 others who hate it.
I like these constellations, and there should be more of them! How aren't you getting this!? You don't understand.
Basically, what makes the constellation you like, special, is that it is special. There isn't another one. It is unique. That might be, perhaps, what makes it so good. Why you like it. Because of novelty. But it probably isn't going to happen again for quite some time. New stars, like the ones you like, don't get made all that often. If ever.
Make more stars like the ones I like, damn it!
'Kay. We're going in circles, now.
Also, let me tell you why I hate Geology.

[Coveny]

You guys are having fun with this aren't you? hehe

What semantics do I need to use to say that I believe there isn't enough magic (in magic being the type that requires hard work, learning, doesn't allows work right, and is dangerous to learn) and there are too many mutants. (in that they don't require any more work than learning to walk, no learning/study, allows works right after you learn to walk, and isn't dangerous to learn)

Also what semantics wouldn't hurt your feeling if I say that because there isn't enough of the above magic, and too much of the above mutants I believe it lowers the value of hard work to young people who are watching it?

These two points are what I have been trying to discuss from the OP. So please tell what is the acceptable way to present THAT topic that doesn't hurt anyone's feelings and I can get a thread about the topic I want to talk about rather than devolving into a semantics debate, or a debate about how I'm categorizing the conversation is wrong, or that I'm insulting someone, or that I'm not open minded enough, or ... any of that?

Have a read and watched other types of magic? Of course, but that's not what I wanted to talk about. Was I saying millennials were lazy, no, but that's how everyone has taken it. Did I say what I defined as magic (because I DID define it in the OP) is the only type or best way to look at magic, no. But this is what I wanted to talk about, so tell me in your infinite knowledge how I should wordsmith a post so I can have THAT discussion...

[Cheesegear]

What semantics do I need to use to say that I believe there isn't enough magic (in magic being the type that requires hard work, learning, doesn't allows work right, and is dangerous to learn) and there are too many mutants. (in that they don't require any more work than learning to walk, no learning/study, allows works right after you learn to walk, and isn't dangerous to learn)

You've said that. You said that in your OP. You've repeated yourself like seven times (not that I counted, but it's a lot). The thread you want, was basically over on the first page. Because there are almost no examples of what you're looking for, and the ones that are kind of similar to what you're looking for, you've already rejected - or already seen. Then you go 'round in circles trying to explain why you've rejected certain mediums. Then people argue semantics with you based on why you rejected a thing and why they think you're wrong.

But, at the core of it, the answer is pretty simple;
D&D-style Wizards are boring to watch. Some people like that sort of thing. But most of the audience doesn't. The audience vastly prefers D&D-style Sorcerers, so that's what Executives and Produces give us. The bits in Harry Potter where the characters are in the Library or in a classroom, while important to exposition (you should never get rid of it completely), but it's the most boring part of the show. 'Exposition' is for books. Or, at least shows that are guaranteed several seasons and can 'waste' episodes dedicated to spamming exposition and world-building at the audience. However, in the current market, TV shows are extended on a seasonal basis, maybe extended by two Seasons at a time, if they're lucky. There's no time for exposition...Only plot.

If you don't like it, that's tough. But there's nothing you can do about it, short of either a) Getting a huge contingent of the audience and demanding a product from the people who make it, with guarantees that the product will 'sell' (good luck with that), or b) Making it yourself (good luck with that).

The problem is, that you pretty much made your point on the first page of the thread; You don't like 'Sorcerer-style magic'. Can anyone think of more Wizard-style magic mediums - that you wont reject or have already seen? No. The reason the thread has devolved, is because the OP's question/statement has already been asked, answered and responded to... Now people are talking about something different as the conversation moves away from the OP...Or, rather, a part of it that you don't want to talk about...

Brings us to the second part of your OP, which people don't want to talk about, because it's incorrect, and to some people, is offensive, in its incorrectness;

That part in the OP where you imply that because people don't earn their Powers, it influences the current generation to be more entitled. That's a really stupid statement, and you may as well say that video games cause children to be more violent. Look where you are, dude. You aren't just attacking a show or movie, you're attacking the people who watch that show. Except if you look around, you'll find that this is basically a place where the people in the thread, watch those shows and movies...So there is no way you can phrase your statement which isn't going to feel like an attack on at least a few of the people in the thread... And anyone who isn't directly offended by your statement... Just thinks the statement is dumb.

[2D8HP]

...I believe there isn't enough magic (in magic being the type that requires hard work, learning, doesn't allows work right, and is dangerous to learn) and there are too many mutants. (in that they don't require any more work than learning to walk, no learning/study, allows works right after you learn to walk, and isn't dangerous to learn)....

.
You're actually describing something closer to what I'd like now @Coveny, except that usually in stories with hard work, that work is rewarded. While some of that is okay, I tend to prefer stories where the magician is defeated, but I can think of one example, where hubris comes close to destroying the magician, but the magician does triumph:

Ursula Le Guin's 1968 novel A Wizard of Earthsea, which was a damn fine book, which was followed by some more novels and short stories in the Earthsea series.

Recommended.

There was a 2006 animated film that's supposed to be loosely based on the series:

Tales from Earthsea



...which I have never seen, but may be worthwhile.

Edit:

Spoiler: Rant for Coveny

Show

Moved to PM

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, I'd forgotten about this:

There is a part of me that thinks this portrayal of instant gratification and power is part of the reason I see so many 20 to 30 years who aren't willing to do hard work. Why work hard when you can just wait for someone with a magic wand to give you all this power.

Ouch. That's aimed directly at people like me, and going 'you lot are lazy'. While there are people my age who are lazy and prefer instant gratification, there are also people who are insanely hard working and don't like anything unless they feel they've earned it. Coveny, the exact same thing is true for people your age, some are willing to do hard work and others aren't.

If there is anything to blame for people my age tending to dislike hard work more the culprit is probably automation, not media. I'm 23, and throughout my life I've seen more and more inventions come along that don't make tasks easier, but stop you from having to do the task entirely. Many people in my year 1-2 class had to be forced to learn how to do calculations because they'd had access to calculators before learning it.

There was a 2006 animated film that's supposed to be loosely based on the series:

Tales from Earthsea



...which I have never seen, but may be worthwhile.

I've seen it and enjoyed it, but I've heard many people dislike it.

[Cheesegear]

If there is anything to blame for people my age tending to dislike hard work more the culprit is probably automation, not media...

10 years ago, my job consisted of handling dangerous chemicals and mechanical know-how. We had a daily test that we had to do, manually, that took about an hour. We had a weekly test take took the whole half-day on Fridays.

5 years ago, we switched to computers. The chemicals are gone, and if something breaks, I send it to the city to get fixed. Even if I wanted to fix it myself, I'm literally not allowed to. The daily test that I used to do, takes all of 5 seconds on a computer, and the weekly test just doesn't get done anymore - that's gone. Software updates to our machines is done through the company's intranet, and the 'manual labour' that I used to do...Is all gone, replaced by data entry into Excel which takes less than 20 minutes. Which is piss easy and my job that I used to take a lot of pride in, is now a joke that pretty much anybody could do as long as they can type.

But no. I work less and have less pride in my work because the media told me to. Pretty sure Coveny's nailed it, right? I'm also not even close to 20 years old.

[snowblizz]

If there is anything to blame for people my age tending to dislike hard work more the culprit is probably automation, not media. I'm 23, and throughout my life I've seen more and more inventions come along that don't make tasks easier, but stop you from having to do the task entirely.

There are many factors at work am sure.

One thing though that comes to my mind is that the basic principle that hard work leads to success seems broken. Already in my time, and I'm about 1 generation older :P, the idea that you went to school, got a degree and that meant you could get a job no longer applied.

When people say millennials don't like to work I think it's because they are more acutely aware that hard work only guarantees hard work, and the only guarantee of success is success. It's not laziness and instant gratification but bitter insight that unless you are rewarded now you probably never will be.

[Anonymouswizard]

10 years ago, my job consisted of handling dangerous chemicals and mechanical know-how. We had a daily test that we had to do, manually, that took about an hour. We had a weekly test take took the whole half-day on Fridays.

5 years ago, we switched to computers. The chemicals are gone, and if something breaks, I send it to the city to get fixed. Even if I wanted to fix it myself, I'm literally not allowed to. The daily test that I used to do, takes all of 5 seconds on a computer, and the weekly test just doesn't get done anymore - that's gone. Software updates to our machines is done through the company's intranet, and the 'manual labour' that I used to do...Is all gone, replaced by data entry into Excel which takes less than 20 minutes. Which is piss easy and my job that I used to take a lot of pride in, is now a joke that pretty much anybody could do as long as they can type.

But no. I work less and have less pride in my work because the media told me to. Nailed it. I'm also not even close to 20 years old.

Dude, I was literally talking about people closer to my age, stop taking it out of context. I was trying to generalise over a specific category, making no reference to the reason why other categories might have similar problems. Maybe people twice my age don't take pride i their work because the work they loved has vanished from it, but that has nothing to do with my point, which was a generation that has grown up with more stuff being automated by before and new stuff being automated all the time might not be as encouraged to work hard because they'll just be replaced by a bot eventually.

@snowblizz: true, there's a lot of reasons. Heck, I've seen people my age go 'I was never any good at maths, so I'm doing an artsy subject because I'm not going to be successful the traditional way' far too many times. I'm currently burnt out by applying for graduate schemes, my degree was weighted against me by focusing on exams and now it's a struggle to get that first foot in the door with this industry (I came out with a third, but consistently hit a 2:1 or better in coursework portions of the degree).

[Cheesegear]

There are many factors at work am sure.

I can think of a ****-ton of psycho-social and economical shifts in the last decade or two (automation being a pretty big one, of which I know about first-hand), that has resulted in the work-ethic of today's workforce - young and older alike. Less than a handful are safe to talk about on a forum like this one. But none of those reasons come anywhere close to blaming fictional characters on TV.
But, as we all know, guys like Bob the Builder are notorious for telling kids to be lazy, right?

Dude, I was literally talking about people closer to my age, stop taking it out of context. I was trying to generalise over a specific category, making no reference to the reason why other categories might have similar problems.

I wasn't actually referring to you, or anything you said. I was building on what you said, in regards to Coveny's point that 'Kids these days' have no work ethic, despite the fact that I'm not a kid, and I, myself, know that my work ethic has gone down the pooper, and turns out, not because of TV.

[Coveny]

You've said that. You said that in your OP. You've repeated yourself like seven times (not that I counted, but it's a lot). The thread you want, was basically over on the first page. Because there are almost no examples of what you're looking for, and the ones that are kind of similar to what you're looking for, you've already rejected - or already seen. Then you go 'round in circles trying to explain why you've rejected certain mediums. Then people argue semantics with you based on why you rejected a thing and why they think you're wrong.

But, at the core of it, the answer is pretty simple;
D&D-style Wizards are boring to watch. Some people like that sort of thing. But most of the audience doesn't. The audience vastly prefers D&D-style Sorcerers, so that's what Executives and Produces give us. The bits in Harry Potter where the characters are in the Library or in a classroom, while important to exposition (you should never get rid of it completely), but it's the most boring part of the show. 'Exposition' is for books. Or, at least shows that are guaranteed several seasons and can 'waste' episodes dedicated to spamming exposition and world-building at the audience. However, in the current market, TV shows are extended on a seasonal basis, maybe extended by two Seasons at a time, if they're lucky. There's no time for exposition...Only plot.

If you don't like it, that's tough. But there's nothing you can do about it, short of either a) Getting a huge contingent of the audience and demanding a product from the people who make it, with guarantees that the product will 'sell' (good luck with that), or b) Making it yourself (good luck with that).

The problem is, that you pretty much made your point on the first page of the thread; You don't like 'Sorcerer-style magic'. Can anyone think of more Wizard-style magic mediums - that you wont reject or have already seen? No. The reason the thread has devolved, is because the OP's question/statement has already been asked, answered and responded to... Now people are talking about something different as the conversation moves away from the OP...Or, rather, a part of it that you don't want to talk about...

Brings us to the second part of your OP, which people don't want to talk about, because it's incorrect, and to some people, is offensive, in its incorrectness;

That part in the OP where you imply that because people don't earn their Powers, it influences the current generation to be more entitled. That's a really stupid statement, and you may as well say that video games cause children to be more violent. Look where you are, dude. You aren't just attacking a show or movie, you're attacking the people who watch that show. Except if you look around, you'll find that this is basically a place where the people in the thread, watch those shows and movies...So there is no way you can phrase your statement which isn't going to feel like an attack on at least a few of the people in the thread... And anyone who isn't directly offended by your statement... Just thinks the statement is dumb.

I've had a couple of responses beyond the first page that were in line with the discussion I wanted to have but the thread is flooded with semantic and ad hominem attacks. (as your post is) Your premise is wrong because as stated Magicians works just fine, and the audience is "bored". And the writing for that show isn't that great, as the books they are based off of aren't that great... and it's still doing well. I get you don't like what I want to talk about, and you like to strawman my position, but that doesn't make it true.

Next as I have already stated I watch this shows, and unlike your false dichotomy attempts to present, I'm not offended by the idea that the shows I watch could be effecting me into having less of a work ethic so you present a false dichotomy. I also already admitted that I misspoke and wasn't referring to millennials. (not that you are actually listening to what I say) I'm referring to children who lack the critical thinking skills to defend themselves from what's presented to them, so NONE of those people are responding to this thread. I attempted to blame my lack of knowing the correct generation to being 45 but was told that wasn't old enough to be able to make those kind of mistakes.

[snowblizz]

Dude, I was literally talking about people closer to my age, stop taking it out of context. I was trying to generalise over a specific category, making no reference to the reason why other categories might have similar problems. Maybe people twice my age don't take pride i their work because the work they loved has vanished from it, but that has nothing to do with my point, which was a generation that has grown up with more stuff being automated by before and new stuff being automated all the time might not be as encouraged to work hard because they'll just be replaced by a bot eventually.

I actually think Cheesegear was agreeing with you. Providing an example of that automation IRL.

But I agree a lot with the idea of automation teaching that hard work can easily disappear.

@snowblizz: true, there's a lot of reasons. Heck, I've seen people my age go 'I was never any good at maths, so I'm doing an artsy subject because I'm not going to be successful the traditional way' far too many times. I'm currently burnt out by applying for graduate schemes, my degree was weighted against me by focusing on exams and now it's a struggle to get that first foot in the door with this industry (I came out with a third, but consistently hit a 2:1 or better in coursework portions of the degree).

Exactly. And all that suggests you really ought not have bothered in the first place right?


On the subject of scholarly magic I agree with Cheesegear too. It's boring to watch people study. Because if nothing else you can't see the progress. You're not engaged with it and there's no stimuli for you to see. Not even shows about learning shows it, but focuses on the stuff around it. There's no way I could convince anyone here to watch a livestream from an exam. Learning happens, but by god is it boring. So boring I once forgot to move enough to keep the lights on in the studyhall. Apparently there was a reason they told me to move around a bit in the room from time to time.

For the record I also don't care much for mutants. I'm not sure why. Probably because I find the "american comic" set-up/process and industry super annoying. Best summarized in a quite form Buffy I believe, parpaphrasing it : "I can't believe we have to know the plural for the word 'apocalypse'".

Most of the reasons why there are few wizard shows mentioned by people in the thread is stuff that makes a lot of sense to me.

[Cheesegear]

I'm referring to children who lack the critical thinking skills to defend themselves from what's presented to them...

So...You're blaming bad parenting; Where they aren't teaching their children the difference between reality and fiction, on TV.
That's not even close to the same argument that you made in the OP, nor what was being discussed on the last page or so.
(That said, I suggest you edit the OP...Maybe clarify what you actually mean as the first thing people read)

In which case...Everyone's parenting style is different. Some are good, some are bad. The end.

[Coveny]

Yeah, I'd forgotten about this:

Ouch. That's aimed directly at people like me, and going 'you lot are lazy'. While there are people my age who are lazy and prefer instant gratification, there are also people who are insanely hard working and don't like anything unless they feel they've earned it. Coveny, the exact same thing is true for people your age, some are willing to do hard work and others aren't.

If there is anything to blame for people my age tending to dislike hard work more the culprit is probably automation, not media. I'm 23, and throughout my life I've seen more and more inventions come along that don't make tasks easier, but stop you from having to do the task entirely. Many people in my year 1-2 class had to be forced to learn how to do calculations because they'd had access to calculators before learning it.



I've seen it and enjoyed it, but I've heard many people dislike it.

Ah well I'm sorry about referencing the effect I believe that caused 20 to 30 year olds I've worked with to lack a work ethic. It's rare to see them come to work on time, and most remind me of that prince song "busy doing something close to nothing, but different from the day before". But that wasn't my point of this thread, the point of this thread was the effect on a much younger crowd, and I will apologize AGAIN about using the 20 to 30 reference as I agree they couldn't be a product of what I'm talking about.

I lost everything in 2006 housing bubble and couldn't feed my children. Since then from hard work I have turned my life around. I quit living on credit cards, quit falling for consumerism, and started working on increasing my net worth every year. As you are what I consider young I will give you the speech I tend to give young people. Do what I did:

1) Take a few career tests to find careers you won't hate
2) If they don't pay at least 50k take them off the list
3) if their aren't a lot of openings in that job field take it off the list

Work to get the knowledge to move to that job field, and stop living off debt. Otherwise you will be like most of my friends and work until you die. Now in person I don't generally add this but because it's on the internet I can. Here is the website that changed my life and made me look at the world in a new way: http://earlyretirementextreme.com/

Now I don't advocate as extreme a plan as some of them are doing, but the foundations are solid. And while I'm at it I will suggest reading this article as it explains how no one cares about you in a capitalist society, they only care about what you can do FOR them. (the story about cutting out the bullet resonated with me in a time when I was flat broke)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-...better-person/

[Coveny]

Dude, I was literally talking about people closer to my age, stop taking it out of context. I was trying to generalise over a specific category, making no reference to the reason why other categories might have similar problems. Maybe people twice my age don't take pride i their work because the work they loved has vanished from it, but that has nothing to do with my point, which was a generation that has grown up with more stuff being automated by before and new stuff being automated all the time might not be as encouraged to work hard because they'll just be replaced by a bot eventually.

Man it must suck to have someone hijack what you wanted to talk about, and make it all about them instead. That must be rough.

[Coveny]

So...You're blaming bad parenting; Where they aren't teaching their children the difference between reality and fiction, on TV.
That's not even close to the same argument that you made in the OP, nor what was being discussed on the last page or so.
(That said, I suggest you edit the OP...Maybe clarify what you actually mean as the first thing people read)

In which case...Everyone's parenting style is different. Some are good, some are bad. The end.

That's not bad parenting, or being able to tell the difference between reality and fiction on TV. It's the same argument I made in the original post no need to edit it because clarification doesn't seem to make a difference in this thread)

TV affects the nature of those who watch it. Just to be clear I'm not talking about TV in general I'm only talking about a specific part of TV that I outlined in my original post. Here is some supporting information on that topic. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792691/

[Anonymouswizard]

I wasn't actually referring to you, or anything you said. I was building on what you said, in regards to Coveny's point that 'Kids these days' have no work ethic, despite the fact that I'm not a kid, and I, myself, know that my work ethic has gone down the pooper, and turns out, not because of TV.

Sorry, my bad, I misunderstood your intent because of the specific bit you quoted. My mistake, I own up to it.

I actually think Cheesegear was agreeing with you. Providing an example of that automation IRL.

But I agree a lot with the idea of automation teaching that hard work can easily disappear.

Exactly. And all that suggests you really ought not have bothered in the first place right?

Yeah, unfortunately by the time I got a drink and looked at it again everybody had posted after me, no use removing the mistake anyway.

Ah well I'm sorry about referencing the effect I believe that caused 20 to 30 year olds I've worked with to lack a work ethic. It's rare to see them come to work on time, and most remind me of that prince song "busy doing something close to nothing, but different from the day before". But that wasn't my point of this thread, the point of this thread was the effect on a much younger crowd, and I will apologize AGAIN about using the 20 to 30 reference as I agree they couldn't be a product of what I'm talking about.

First off, there is a massive variation in 20-30 year olds, maybe you just got unlucky. Secondly, can cut the 'kids these days' stuff please, I like it when people like 2D8HP actually manage to make 'crochety old man' feel friendly, because it's obvious he doesn't care about how my table differs from what he'd like because it doesn't actually affect him, you just make me feel insulted for being younger than you (also, guess what? most of those 20-30 year olds will probably get a better work ethic as they get older).

I lost everything in 2006 housing bubble and couldn't feed my children. Since then from hard work I have turned my life around. I quit living on credit cards, quit falling for consumerism, and started working on increasing my net worth every year.

I'm sorry it happened to you, but what does this have to do with anything?

As you are what I consider young I will give you the speech I tend to give young people. Do what I did:

1) Take a few career tests to find careers you won't hate
2) If they don't pay at least 50k take them off the list
3) if there aren't a lot of openings in that job field take it off the list

Work to get the knowledge to move to that job field, and stop living off debt. Otherwise you will be like most of my friends and work until you die. Now in person I don't generally add this but because it's on the internet I can. Here is the website that changed my life and made me look at the world in a new way: http://earlyretirementextreme.com/

First off, if you're going to lecture me don't mess up there/their/they're, it makes you look incompetent. Luckily for you I've fixed it. Too harsh? I'm honestly not sure here.

Secondly, don't lecture me before you know me. 'If it doesn't pay at least 50k take them off the list'? Dude, that would make my list consist of the following items:

I'll be lucky if I can find a graduate job willing to give me £25,000, and that's in engineering. Instead I'm just looking to get into the industry in any way I can, once I've got a job and am getting experience in the field then I can worry about how much they're paying me. Lecturing me for a situation obviously very different to my own comes off as patronising, 'oh don't apply for jobs that'll actually motivate you to have a good work ethic, they don't pay enough.

Now I don't advocate as extreme a plan as some of them are doing, but the foundations are solid. And while I'm at it I will suggest reading this article as it explains how no one cares about you in a capitalist society, they only care about what you can do FOR them. (the story about cutting out the bullet resonated with me in a time when I was flat broke)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-...better-person/

I'll have a look at the articles, but honestly? I don't need you to lecture me about capitalism, I spend enough time arguing about it with my friends already.

[Cheesegear]

I'm going to do my best to keep this within forum rules.

Just to be clear I'm not talking about TV in general I'm only talking about a specific part of TV that I outlined in my original post. Here is some supporting information on that topic. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2792691/

In which case it comes down to parenting, and a parent actually controlling or guiding what their child watches. Again. Parenting. Not the fault of the TV, itself.
There are actually government guidelines on what can and can't be shown to children. As I said before, stuff like Bob the Builder and LazyTown aren't exactly known for teaching kids to be terrible. If you know what your child is watching, there's no problem. If you don't know what your child is watching, and you're noticing behavioral problems in your child and aren't doing anything about them...Again, parenting.

I had a severe behavioral problem in my teenage years. My Dad immediately enrolled me in ju-jitsu (because it was now the '90s and you weren't allowed to hit your kids anymore, so his plan was to pay someone to do it for him). Which taught me discipline, and kind of ingrained into me that I can be punched in the head if I say or do the wrong thing, against the wrong person (it also taught me how to punch other people in the head, but that's another topic for another time that has already gotten my into trouble on this forum). I still go to the gym today (dude bros and all), as my job is no longer physically taxing, so I have to get my exercise from somewhere.

It's rare to see them come to work on time

Are they being reprimanded? Three strikes and fired? How is that allowed? If your business that you work for does allow them coming to work repeatedly late, then there's no problem. That's all on the business and you need to bring it up with your boss. Your business allows it, so it doesn't matter what you think. They're doing exactly what the business allows them to. Who they probably don't care about, is their co-workers. In which case there should be a stack of complaints on them showing up to work late and not doing early-shift work (like Opens), and if they can't be part of a team, then they're fired.
If no-one complains about them, they're not doing anything wrong... And I say that as someone who supervises staff regularly. What I don't do, is micromanage them. If I don't see them not doing their job, then I rely on the other staff to watch them. I've got my own work to do, and since I know, personally, that my job isn't even hard (as mentioned previously), theirs must not be too taxing either. But I do expect them to do a minimum amount of work... And if they do more than the minimum, as is what is occasionally required of them, then I make sure to include it in their reference they ask of me when it comes time to leave (because they aren't getting promoted to Line Manager, 'cause that's my job, and I'm not leaving, even if I hate it). If they're constantly doing the minimum required, or actually doing less (such as showing up late or taking longer breaks), I make a note of it, and pass it up the chain...Then they ask for a reference, and I say that any reference I give will probably not be very good.

If there are no consequences, then there's no problem.

The business determines how hard you have to work, by what metrics they offer promotions and terminations. Then again, some people aren't interested in promotions, 'cause that almost certainly comes with extra work/responsibility that they don't want to do, aren't able to deal with, or are just unready for - especially at 18-20 years old. Some schools have academic probation, where if your grades aren't high enough, you can't do extra-curriculars...But if the child in question doesn't do extra-curriculars (at least, not any through the school), then their grades don't matter. If you have parents that don't care about grades ("Just do what makes you happy, kid."), then they don't matter, either. There are no consequences to their actions. TV didn't teach them that. Actual life, did. Their parents say "Don't try hard if you don't want to."
...'What is enabling?'

Or, they don't want a promotion, because they don't want extra work, 'cause they're actually lazy. But I'm not going to say that about anyone, I'm not going to make broad statements about all of the people in the same demographic, and I'm especially not going to blame it on TV. Now, TV might be a factor in certain children's behavior. But it's so far down the list.

Again, when I was a terrible kid, my Dad stepped in and had me beaten up twice a week sent me to a place to teach me discipline, and that there'd be consequences to my bad behaviour; Whether I had to do extra laps around the gym, extra push ups, or being paired to spar with the wrong right partner. I also had a Dad (and Mum) who would actively punish me when my grades weren't high enough.

I once swore at my Mum. She turned her ring around and slapped me in the face. I've never sworn at my Mum, since.
I have a friend, who swears often and repeatedly around and at his Mum. His Mum swears right back. That is not a consequence. So he still swears at her.

I made a joke at work, my coworkers complained and my pay was docked. Crap. I need that money.
Another of my friends works in a warehouse did pretty much the same thing, his co-workers laughed. So he still makes the joke every now and then.
There were negative consequences to my actions. But positive ones to his. I wonder, of the two of us, whose behavior changed... And TV wasn't involved at all. And we're both adults.

I lost everything in 2006 housing bubble and couldn't feed my children. Since then from hard work I have turned my life around. I quit living on credit cards, quit falling for consumerism, and started working on increasing my net worth every year. As you are what I consider young I will give you the speech I tend to give young people.

Clearly up front; Congratulations, well done. But, for the purposes of this thread, were you recklessly spending money before that, were you not working hard? And if so, do you blame TV for it? If you do blame TV for it, do you have a specific show that you can point to? Have I seen that show (pretty sure we sound about the same age)? Did we both get the same thing out of it?

Life teaches you that actions have consequences - positively and negatively. As you and I both know. If it doesn't...If a child needs TV of all things to teach them about consequences, and work ethic...What are the parents doing? What are schools doing?

At this point we're not really talking about TV, and we're talking about how actions may or may not have consequences, and why certain actions don't have consequences in certain environments is certainly against forum rules. I now understand where the OP is coming from... Which can't accurately be discussed on this forum due to forum rules, anyway. So, I'm done with this thread.

[Knaight]

What semantics do I need to use to say that I believe there isn't enough magic (in magic being the type that requires hard work, learning, doesn't allows work right, and is dangerous to learn) and there are too many mutants. (in that they don't require any more work than learning to walk, no learning/study, allows works right after you learn to walk, and isn't dangerous to learn).

Hey look, the definition changed again - hard work, learning, and dangerous unreliability are a very different set of heuristics than daily memorization, spellbooks, and material components.

As for the semantics necessary, picking a single definition that doesn't fluctuate wildly between posts would be a good starting point.

[Coveny]

guess what? most of those 20-30 year olds will probably get a better work ethic as they get older).

Fair point.

I'm sorry it happened to you, but what does this have to do with anything?

You had a bad start? You having trouble finding work that pays well? Me being flat broke and up to my ears in debt 11 years ago I guess has nothing to do with .... anything. hehe

First off, if you're going to lecture me don't mess up there/their/they're, it makes you look incompetent. Luckily for you I've fixed it. Too harsh? I'm honestly not sure here.

Ah the intelligence is memorization camp. As long as we are making judgements about the way each other looks. It's been my experience that people who use the words like "honestly", and "truly" lie so much that they have to tell you "hey I normally like but this time... this time I'm telling the truth... believe me..." Makes you look like a liar.

Secondly, don't lecture me before you know me. 'If it doesn't pay at least 50k take them off the list'? Dude, that would make my list consist of the following items:

Wanna bet?

I'll be lucky if I can find a graduate job willing to give me £25,000, and that's in engineering. Instead I'm just looking to get into the industry in any way I can, once I've got a job and am getting experience in the field then I can worry about how much they're paying me. Lecturing me for a situation obviously very different to my own comes off as patronising, 'oh don't apply for jobs that'll actually motivate you to have a good work ethic, they don't pay enough.

Mechanical Engineer average 68k a year according to payscale.

I'll have a look at the articles, but honestly? I don't need you to lecture me about capitalism, I spend enough time arguing about it with my friends already.

Doesn't sound like you understand capitalism very well (25k a year? pfft), maybe you need to pick smarter friends who aren't so good at memorizing grammar, and actually understand reality instead...

[Coveny]

I'm going to do my best to keep this within forum rules.

In which case it comes down to parenting, and a parent actually controlling or guiding what their child watches. Again. Parenting. Not the fault of the TV, itself.
There are actually government guidelines on what can and can't be shown to children. As I said before, stuff like Bob the Builder and LazyTown aren't exactly known for teaching kids to be terrible. If you know what your child is watching, there's no problem. If you don't know what your child is watching, and you're noticing behavioral problems in your child and aren't doing anything about them...Again, parenting.

I had a severe behavioral problem in my teenage years. My Dad immediately enrolled me in ju-jitsu (because it was now the '90s and you weren't allowed to hit your kids anymore, so his plan was to pay someone to do it for him). Which taught me discipline, and kind of ingrained into me that I can be punched in the head if I say or do the wrong thing, against the wrong person (it also taught me how to punch other people in the head, but that's another topic for another time that has already gotten my into trouble on this forum). I still go to the gym today (dude bros and all), as my job is no longer physically taxing, so I have to get my exercise from somewhere.

Are they being reprimanded? Three strikes and fired? How is that allowed? If your business that you work for does allow them coming to work repeatedly late, then there's no problem. That's all on the business and you need to bring it up with your boss. Your business allows it, so it doesn't matter what you think. They're doing exactly what the business allows them to. Who they probably don't care about, is their co-workers. In which case there should be a stack of complaints on them showing up to work late and not doing early-shift work (like Opens), and if they can't be part of a team, then they're fired.
If no-one complains about them, they're not doing anything wrong... And I say that as someone who supervises staff regularly. What I don't do, is micromanage them. If I don't see them not doing their job, then I rely on the other staff to watch them. I've got my own work to do, and since I know, personally, that my job isn't even hard (as mentioned previously), theirs must not be too taxing either. But I do expect them to do a minimum amount of work... And if they do more than the minimum, as is what is occasionally required of them, then I make sure to include it in their reference they ask of me when it comes time to leave (because they aren't getting promoted to Line Manager, 'cause that's my job, and I'm not leaving, even if I hate it). If they're constantly doing the minimum required, or actually doing less (such as showing up late or taking longer breaks), I make a note of it, and pass it up the chain...Then they ask for a reference, and I say that any reference I give will probably not be very good.

If there are no consequences, then there's no problem.

The business determines how hard you have to work, by what metrics they offer promotions and terminations. Then again, some people aren't interested in promotions, 'cause that almost certainly comes with extra work/responsibility that they don't want to do, aren't able to deal with, or are just unready for - especially at 18-20 years old. Some schools have academic probation, where if your grades aren't high enough, you can't do extra-curriculars...But if the child in question doesn't do extra-curriculars (at least, not any through the school), then their grades don't matter. If you have parents that don't care about grades ("Just do what makes you happy, kid."), then they don't matter, either. There are no consequences to their actions. TV didn't teach them that. Actual life, did. Their parents say "Don't try hard if you don't want to."
...'What is enabling?'

Or, they don't want a promotion, because they don't want extra work, 'cause they're actually lazy. But I'm not going to say that about anyone, I'm not going to make broad statements about all of the people in the same demographic, and I'm especially not going to blame it on TV. Now, TV might be a factor in certain children's behavior. But it's so far down the list.

Again, when I was a terrible kid, my Dad stepped in and had me beaten up twice a week sent me to a place to teach me discipline, and that there'd be consequences to my bad behaviour; Whether I had to do extra laps around the gym, extra push ups, or being paired to spar with the wrong right partner. I also had a Dad (and Mum) who would actively punish me when my grades weren't high enough.

I once swore at my Mum. She turned her ring around and slapped me in the face. I've never sworn at my Mum, since.
I have a friend, who swears often and repeatedly around and at his Mum. His Mum swears right back. That is not a consequence. So he still swears at her.

I made a joke at work, my coworkers complained and my pay was docked. Crap. I need that money.
Another of my friends works in a warehouse did pretty much the same thing, his co-workers laughed. So he still makes the joke every now and then.
There were negative consequences to my actions. But positive ones to his. I wonder, of the two of us, whose behavior changed... And TV wasn't involved at all. And we're both adults.



Clearly up front; Congratulations, well done. But, for the purposes of this thread, were you recklessly spending money before that, were you not working hard? And if so, do you blame TV for it? If you do blame TV for it, do you have a specific show that you can point to? Have I seen that show (pretty sure we sound about the same age)? Did we both get the same thing out of it?

Life teaches you that actions have consequences - positively and negatively. As you and I both know. If it doesn't...If a child needs TV of all things to teach them about consequences, and work ethic...What are the parents doing? What are schools doing?

At this point we're not really talking about TV, and we're talking about how actions may or may not have consequences, and why certain actions don't have consequences in certain environments is certainly against forum rules. I now understand where the OP is coming from... Which can't accurately be discussed on this forum due to forum rules, anyway. So, I'm done with this thread.

in the course of working at my last three jobs I've seen roughly 6 people between the ages of 20 and 30 and 5 of them were late, didn't do they work, and 5 ended up getting fired. Now I freely admit that this is anecdotal evidence which is at its bases flawed, and biased. This was not my point.

Same with parenting. This has nothing to do with parenting regardless of how much you want to blame parents, and refuse to blame the movie industry or media in general. Nor was this my point.

My point is that there are several factors that indicated there are not enough magic shows and too many mutant TV shows. I appreciate it if you would stop strawmaning my position. Is it so tough to look at those two things as I have described them and have a conversation about it???

Nevermind, you said your done with this thread, good day to you sir, I hope you are true to your word.

[Coveny]

Hey look, the definition changed again - hard work, learning, and dangerous unreliability are a very different set of heuristics than daily memorization, spellbooks, and material components.

As for the semantics necessary, picking a single definition that doesn't fluctuate wildly between posts would be a good starting point.

The OP was "long hours of hard work" for magic that wasn't "a magic wand and poof you're Magneto". So hard work explicitly listed. Dangerous and learning was implicitly listed. I would expect it to be understand in a gaming forums that "long hours of hard work" as a magic involved learning and danger, but if you can tell what else mage would be doing in long hours of hard work other than learning I'm all ears. As for the danger part, I tend to think of dealing with fireballs as dangerous, but I guess you don't see it that way, we'll agree to disagree on that subject. But ya sure "fluctuate wildly between posts"...

[Cheesegear]

[Self-Scrubbed].

I guess when you offer up anecdotal evidence and opinions, your personal beliefs and opinions become your argument.
When you're using your personal beliefs as your argument, you don't get to turn around and complain that you're being straw-manned. Because any debate on the topic is automatically a straw man, because the person in question, is using their life, to form their arguments.

"You can't use that argument 'cause it's a straw man, but let me tell you about my personal life and what I've seen, personally...But you can't debate me on it, 'cause that would be a straw man."

EDIT:
Yeah, any recommendations for TV and Movies that I would get out of this thread, I already got on the first two pages.
The second 'half' of this thread should never have been brought up on a forum like this anyway.