le_halfhand_easy said: That depends. Does The Structure of Scientific Revolutions count? Huh. So you've read Kuhn. It seems I've underestimated you. Gigguk and Explanation Point have their moments of brilliance. They're pretty good. Pedantic Romantic has only one good video. I think he's better than that. However, the accusations of him being a Digibro fanboy hold weight. He's repeatedly come to Digi's defense unasked, even against those Digibro himself ignores. Just watch Under The Scope, the amount of reach he may take at times notwithstanding.... Jack is a feelings guy. He relies often on conveying emotions (with his speech, editing, and music) as much as imparting his viewpoints, and I appreciate that.... He's another one of those reader-response guys. He's really good at crafting videos which develop and communicate his response to a show effectively. |
FvlminatvsAug 13, 2017 12:14 PM
Read? Yes. Understood fully? No. Okay we may have a little bit of misunderstanding here. My "fixed that for you post" was not aimed at you. I strikethrough'd the point that is easily misconstrued and may seem contradictory to the rest of your points and underlined the point I hoped many would take to heart. As I've said before on one of those arguments: While there is no such thing as perfectly objective, it shouldn’t be for the lack of trying. We can’t be objective but we can try to be as less subjective as possible. We can and should be as critical as possible. Especially with the things we love. Anything less is a disservice because criticisms offer an avenue of growth and appreciation. Not only to the industry but to yourself. It helps to know why you like or hate that particular scene or character or show. Knowing what you like and what you hate and what you want more of is an endless journey of self-discovery and growth. Trust me, the things you love and the things you hate tells you a little bit about yourself after a little bit of self reflection. Sorry if it seemed barbed and directed at you. It's the reddit syndrome of getting used to using ftfy as vaguely comedic shots in the dark. EDIT: And for quickly trying to sass you back instead of clarifying immediately. |
EankiAug 13, 2017 12:41 PM
 You gave up your freedom of speech when you clicked Agree to the User Agreement This is not a public platform. My gaze is the measure of all things: I stopped considering "anime" a helpful tag Recommended Essays Exploring Actually Excellent World-Building |
ThatCynicalOtaku said: The homepage of his channel says, Gonzo Journalism, a form of writing in which someone inserts themselves into the story. You can analyze how and why you feel towards a work. That doesn't contradict the fact that he is also functionally a reader-response critic, whether he knows it or not. This is not a zero-sum dichotomy, here. The problem is, he's not a journalist in the "reporting on events" sense. He gives his opinion. The founder of gonzo journalism, Hunter S. Thompson, put his alter-ego, Raoul Duke, into the stories upon which he reported so everything was skewed by Duke's perspective. Digibro doesn't do that--at least, not in the same way. He's autobiographical but the discussion focuses less on events being reported and more on his own ideas. "Gonzo anime critic" or something similar may be a bit more accurate. Which is exactly what videos like I Wish Scum's Wish Was Scummier are. Again with the zero-sum crap. That video is a fine example of reader-response criticism. He talked about how it made him feel, which is a perfectly fine (if rudimentary) example. Just because he talks about himself in tandem with the text doesn't make this not some form of criticism. But videos like the Gurren Lagann are analysis of themes and symbolism. So if he never talks about himself but only the show's themes, etc., that's analysis to you? Dude, there is waay more to it than that. ... Okay, I checked your age and you are 17?!?! Alright, first let me apologize because I've been coming down on you pretty hard. I didn't realize how young you were. Second, you're taking stabs at fields and ideas about which you don't know anything yet. (The keyword, here, is "yet"). I assumed you were older and a bit more experienced and for that I apologize. Alright, don't just take my word for it. You seem to be operating with the unspoken assumption that these things are all mutually exclusive--they aren't. They overlap, like a Venn Diagram. Gonzo Journalism can be an example of reader response criticism, it is a tool for analysis. Criticism does not only mean evaluating whether or not something is good or bad, especially when you are talking about film, literature, television, music, art, etc. le_halfhand_easy said: Read? Yes. Understood fully? No. You still have a leg up on most people. Okay we may have a little bit of misunderstanding here. My "fixed that for you post" was not aimed at you. I strikethrough'd the point that is easily misconstrued and may seem contradictory to the rest of your points and underlined the point I hoped many would take to heart. Thank you for the explanation. And I should apologize for getting agitated. I saw the underlined point #5 but without point #1, point #5 was logically unsound. Anyway, I see what you were doing better, now. I disagree with you on some of the semantics but that is because of the license with which so many people take it in order to justify their behaviors and shield themselves and their thoughts from criticism. Sorry if it seemed barbed and directed at you. It's the reddit syndrome of getting used to using ftfy as vaguely comedic shots in the dark. EDIT: And for quickly trying to sass you back instead of clarifying immediately. Hey, sorry for getting so agitated. This is an argument I am sick to death of seeing. People swing whole "subjectivity hammer" constantly and it just shuts down discussion. |
FvlminatvsAug 13, 2017 12:48 PM
| Let's just get to the point. Fvlminatvs said: I've been nice about this but I am starting to lose patience. It is an utterly pedantic argument pushed by rank amateurs with very little actual literary education or training beyond what they managed to pass in high school and it is smugly used as a conversation stopper and intellectually bankrupt automatic-win button. Fvlminatvs said: le_halfhand_easy said: Fixed that for you. Oh, yes, a 22-year-old kid who never read Immanuel Kant, Plato, Karl Popper, or Thomas Kuhn is going to have a definitive comeback against my assertions regarding the existence of objectivity. Consider me schooled. Fvlminatvs said: That and I am tired of the kindergarten-level rhetoric being bandied about by people with maybe a semester of basic college writing under their belts, saying "objectivity doesn't exist" as a conversation stopper and instant-win-button debate tactic. That it is usually accompanied by a smug arrogance despite having barely any actual literary or philosophical background speaks volumes about the intellectual honesty of those who apply this overused canard. This entire business is virtually a non-debate in academic circles. When I mention this to my lit prof colleagues they are absolutely perplexed because this is such a non-issue to anyone with a shred of real, actual education. Fvlminatvs said: I've discussed this elsewhere. I don't feel like reiterating myself ad infinitum about an pointless argument. The fact is, I personally know lit profs who think this entire debate makes zero sense and achieves nothing. Fvlminatvs said: These guys are also very young and never really lived, done anything, held down physically or intellectually demanding jobs (and writing for a video game website is not demanding, trust me, I'm published in the academic world), suffered real loss (and no, a breakup isn't a real loss--divorce, child custody battles, death, serious injury--these are loss), or any actual experiences in actual adult life. They live in small worlds and think they're really damn smart. They've formed cliques around themselves and slap each other on the back with self-congratulatory solipsism. This results in a complete and total absence of perspective and it shows in everything they produce. It limits their vision and their scope. It will prevent them from achieving anything more than being able to pay bills and buy figures and Blu-Rays for the time being. The internet is full of flashes in the pan and these guys are inevitably going to disappear because the internet's attention span is tragically brief. Nobody watches Strong Bad anymore and, similarly, it is likely that nobody is going to watch Mother's Basement or Digibro in 2027. This entire business is virtually a non-debate in academic circles. When I mention this to my lit prof colleagues they are absolutely perplexed because this is such a non-issue to anyone with a shred of real, actual education The fact is, I personally know lit profs who think this entire debate makes zero sense and achieves nothing. They live in small worlds and think they're really damn smart. They've formed cliques around themselves and slap each other on the back with self-congratulatory solipsism. How on earth am I supposed to take your ranting about how an approach to discussion placing emphasis on the existence of more than a singular truth existing being used as merely but a discussion stopper whenever you've consistently brought up "I have experience I'm an academic. You're just a kid." as legitimate key points to your posts in the past couple of days? Putting aside how I've read your posts on the topic and you've done absolutely nothing to prove that what you're asserting as fact is fact - at best provided thought and reasoning and done nothing to solidify your assertions as an absolute truth - and then just arrogantly waving away anybody who disagrees with your rhetoric as "uninformed" or "not academic" and "juvenile" because they're not placing enough trust in your judgement as somebody who claims to be an academic. You namedrop authors on occasion without even explaining their theories and ideas and expecting people to accept what you have to say as inherently better because of as much and then try to mitigate the value of other people's thoughts and ideas because you just childishly and arrogantly assume that they're unfamiliar with. Tell me, what kind of academic would bring up experience as a means to try and squish and ridicule somebody else's argument? What kind of academic consistently makes uneducated insinuations painting everybody who believes in a theory or idea in broad strokes as being uneducated and juvenile? You're going to have to start proving your idea as fact rather than just vapidly saying "I'm an academic. I'm in academic circles and everybody thinks this idea is laughable." If you want to believe that you're better than everybody else here then that's fine, but if you want to actually place value on what you have to say then you're going to have prove what you say is of worth, rather than just claiming it is. You have not done so on this topic thus far, you mostly just try to sit on a mountain and look down on everybody else based on claims you've yet to substantiate in any meaningful matter. Just because we're laypeople doesn't make us stupid, believe it or not. Many more people than you'd be willing to admit are capable of forming their own opinions and trying to bring them into a discussion on a topic, even if you want to dismiss them as being lesser because they don't possess the horizon you desire them to possess. It seems I had the wrong impression of you. I thought you would be able to provide insightful and meaningful conversation rather than do the age-old addage of assert something as a fact, do very little to provide evidence to support the factuality of what's really just your own theories and reasoning, and then dismiss anybody who disagrees with your sentiment as being lesser in some form. The more you rely on arguments like you've been making like this, the less different you are than the people who use subjectivity as a crutch to escape hearing out differing viewpoints. You're not much different as it stands - "lol you're this old and haven't read this thing I'm namedropping and doing nothing to explain anything over because I expect you to read it before being able to possess a valuable opinion on a topic because I'm deciding that's the case. I'm an academic, you can trust my judgement." You're not special. You have to actually explain why you think people are incorrect just like everybody else, and you have to substantiate your claims of something being fact in a way that's meaningful and actually asserts it as fact like everybody else, too - and no, just saying "facts exist," "people have worked on minimizing personal bias for thousands of years," and "I've read these theories and belong to academic circles" does not count as an adequate mean of substantiating reasoning and theorizing as a truth. Theories are theories trying to reach some sort of truth and better understanding, not concrete evidence to support the truth in what you're claiming. What are you going to say in response to me here, by the way? Are you just going to call me a 20 year old kid who hasn't read over theories regarding literary analysis and wave my criticisms of your childish approach to discussion off like you've done with practically everybody else, or are you going to actually do something to prove what I'm saying as incorrect and give more value to your thoughts and ideas on the topic than what I'm ascribing them as possessing? Will you just accuse me of just not wanting to hear your thoughts out because I believe in the idea of subjectivity and not the idea of objectivity, or recognize what I'm actually saying with this post and how it has to do with the (petty) way you argue these ideas and not just because you possess said ideas? |
ManabanAug 13, 2017 1:27 PM
 |
| Eh, I wouldn't go as fully aggressive as Manaban, but I'm actually interested on hearing your elaborations on this stuff you claim, @Fvlminatvs. I respect your knowledge and background on the matter and I'm sure you can give yourself lengthy and eloquent explanations, rather than the name-dropping and constant reference to external sources that is so useful for personal research but so inconvenient for the dynamics of a discussion. |
jal90Aug 13, 2017 2:14 PM
| Are we forgetting that subjective opinions are often substantiated by objective fact? eg. Sailor Moon & Cardcaptor Sakura can be considered great works of the magical girl genre because stylistic decisions from these shows have become conventions of the genre - eg. elaborate transformations |
jal90 said: Eh, I wouldn't go as fully aggressive as Manaban, but I'm actually interested on hearing your elaborations on this stuff you claim, @Fvlminatvs. I respect your knowledge and background on the matter and I'm sure you can give yourself lengthy and eloquent explanations, rather than the name-dropping and constant reference to external sources that is so useful for personal research but so inconvenient for the dynamics of a discussion. For clarification's sake, @Fvlminatvs, I am also interested in hearing you out in this vein. I took an aggressive stance because I do consistently take an aggressive stance against that kind of dismissal in all of its various forms - in defense of people getting accused of elitism based on their preferences or opinions, people merely defending a type of content they like getting accused of fanboyism for having the audacity to disagree, so on and so forth, and I view the gist of what you're saying with "I'm academic and you're not so phooey" to be along the same lines. Dismissal should be based on the reasons they give or how they present that reasoning, in my eyes, and not because you don't consider them worthwhile because "I am part of academic circles and you haven't even read these authors I'm namedropping lolol." Put it in the inverse - as a layperson with no university level schooling, would it not be arrogant of me to just claim your opinions are invalid and juvenile because you have a different horizon and approach than I do without as much as hearing out the thoughts and ideas you have to offer because you come from a different circle and background than I do? I am very much willing to rescind my accusations towards your character and apologize for as much, and I'm willing to hear out any further explanations you have to offer as well. YuiHirasawachan said: Are we forgetting that subjective opinions are often substantiated by objective fact? eg. Sailor Moon & Cardcaptor Sakura can be considered great works of the magical girl genre because stylistic decisions from these shows have become conventions of the genre - eg. elaborate transformations Eh, it's still possible for somebody to like a type of series and not be particularly fond of most of the conventions that certain trailblazers in the genre brought to the table. being a fan of a certain type of content doesn't necessitate being monolithic and enjoying every single convention that genre has to offer basically |
ManabanAug 13, 2017 3:10 PM
|
| They are ok i guess didn't really watched many anlysis video.Mostly they are too long i rather checking mal synopsis , score and reviews its enough for me. To check those videos i must really like or dislike the anime and want to hear what others thinks about it , deatiled info about why its good or bad mostly its not the case. i dont watch anlysis videos for decide to watch or not. |
 |
| Manaban summed up my issues with your common approach to discussion as of late very well, @Fvlminatvs, and I would be interested in hearing a more detailed explanation from you myself. Although I do recognize that his wording is aggressive, I personally find it hard to fault him since the dismissive and largely hypocritical attitude of your post tries to get under my skin as well, and I think the points he made were appropriate. |
| @Manaban, I owe you, @ThatCynicalOtaku, @le_halfhand_easy, and @TheBrainInTheJar (from elsewhere) an apology. Also, lots of other people I (by implication) on this thread and forum (like @TripleSRank). Manaban, you delivered a much-needed dose of humility. Yeah, medicine is bitter but sometimes we need it. I let my frustration get the better of me and came off as arrogant and derisive. Although that wasn't my intention, I did it and for that I offer my sincere apologies. Manaban, it is difficult for me to explain the whole subjectivity vs. objectivity in a way that PROVES anything because it is likely that you or most others have read as much on this topic as I have. There is very little philosophy and literary criticism out there that really treats the dichotomy as a debate in the first place. Objectivity and subjectivity are discussed as part of greater overall epistemological discussions. I could point to a ton of authors and I could try to describe where to start but I don't want to deliver walls of text (anymore than I usually do). That which is objectively good is discussed as early as Plato's Republic (the Theory of Forms section). I get frustrated about it because I see it as serving no constructive purpose--indeed, I feel it is destructive. I'm not sure what else to say here. As for Digibro and other anime YouTubers, I don't want them to be super-intellectual like Pause and Select. What I do want them to do is improve. I often watch them and find issues with their reasoning that they wouldn't have. Digibro will oftentimes say something and I'll find myself saying, "Oh, dude, if only you had read this essay or that book, you'd know that what you said is just in error." These guys often err out of ignorance a lot. Like I said elsewhere, Digibro often commits the Affective Fallacy, the opposite of the Intentional Fallacy (aka, "Authorial Intent Fallacy) and if he knew more he could avoid or mitigate it. Frankly, I think Digibro is damn smart. Really damn smart. He's the kind of guy I love having in my classes because he will challenge the hell out of me and I'd be confident he'd come out having learned a ton. He's unrefined, untrained, unpracticed. I see his potential and I am frustrated because I think he could be top tier, a published anime scholar, giving mindblowing insight into the medium and putting anime on the same map of art that film has finally achieved. I could go on about others but I am pressed for time so I have to wrap this post up. I hope that sums up how I feel about a lot of these guys. I hope it also doesn't come off as arrogant. If you guys are still interested, maybe I'll post more later but for now, I probably should just lay low on this discussion. |
FvlminatvsAug 13, 2017 9:33 PM
ThatCynicalOtaku said: Zapredon said: I think it's important for us to understand that there are difference between reviewing and analyzing. Reviewing usually talk about quality of something which is why we give score ranging from 1-10 while analyze don't. I've analyze literature like Phantom of the Opera, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde,Robinson Crusoe and the film Good Will Hunting where I analyze their theme, character growth etc. However, in those analyze I went through I've never been asked to give score or compare which literature is better (probably because objective good don't exist). There is a common misunderstanding among the anime community where they think analyze(theme,symbolism etc) and review is the same when there are actually difference.Those youtube anime channel when mentioned review are talking about quality so they don't really need to analyze everything. Analyze=/=Review So could you give an example of how Digi fails at analyzing? No because I wasn't implying Digi fail at analyzing. Just pointing out there are difference between analyzing theme,symbolism and review. Reviewer doesn't need to analyze everything since they are reviewer and only need to talk about the quality part but if they do analyze beyond that, it's extra icing on cake. Good post there by Manaban. Not the first time such thing occur. I had a similar argument with PianoManGregory before where all he did is saying he is better, making ad hominem without provide evidence to show what they assert as a fact is a fact. Up until now,I still haven't see anyone providing insight or evidence that there are objective good anime other than going into circle and they just insist.I notice that it always those who believe in objective unable to explain,going into circle while the subjective believer usually don't have problem to explain why it subjective. Quoting people like Plato etc can be interesting but still flawed because while Plato has influence on Greece and western civilization, Japan who are far east probably never heard of name like Plato during thousand years ago, thus their opinion on this matter might be different from all those notable philosopher in west and Japan are probably influenced by their domestic philosopher. |
ZapredonAug 13, 2017 10:51 PM
But it's important to remember that a movie review is subjective;it only gives you one person's opinion. http://www.classzone.com/books/lnetwork_gr08/page_build.cfm?content=analyz_media&ch=30 It doesn't matter if you like LoGH,Monster etc.If you are a jobless or college/school dropout living in your mom basement, you are still an unintelligent loser. Taste in anime does not make you a better person.If elitist don't exist, casual pleb and shit taste also don't exist. |
ThatCynicalOtaku said: If you made a forum or a post, giving a breakdown on your issues with Digibro, or any other anime youtuber, I'd love to read it. Okay, maybe tomorrow if I'm not busy. But you never said anything wrong to me, so why are you apologizing? I think I came down a bit hard on you, as well as the other guys, and just people in general with my frustrations. |
FvlminatvsAug 13, 2017 9:40 PM
| Gigguk and Momkey Jones best channels |
    |
| I actually like digi, which seems to be an unpopular opinion here. A lot of people say they don't like him because he's arrogant (which can be the case sometimes) , but I don't mind. He is good at explaining why a show means something to him, which I value. I've never been into consumer review YouTube channels like arkada because he feels to distant from the content he makes which makes it much less interesting to me. I also like MB, but the way he's arrogant rubs me the wrong way for some reason. The shilling is pretty annoying and his comedy is definitely not my thing. Makes some decent points though Best guy ever is great, even if he hardly uploads best anime ever episodes. His videos on gurren lagann are perfect. He's a bit lesser known than these other two but probably better. I don't see gigguk as an analysis channel, because most of his vids are comedy that I don't find funny. So I don't watch him. Never really got the hype for demo d. He's good, not that good though. Other good ones that I don't have anything to say about: ninouh, pedantic romantic, super eyepatch wolf, rogersmith2004, mathwhiz97, mumkey jones ( though he's more comedy) plus hardly makes anime stuff anymore. |
Big breast are full of dreams, but small breast are full of hope. |
Fvlminatvs said: The problems with explaining concepts that should be kept in classrooms and larger theoretical spheres than on a board about anime. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯Manaban, it is difficult for me to explain the whole subjectivity vs. objectivity in a way that PROVES anything because it is likely that you or most others have read as much on this topic as I have. There is very little philosophy and literary criticism out there that really treats the dichotomy as a debate in the first place. Objectivity and subjectivity are discussed as part of greater overall epistemological discussions. I could point to a ton of authors and I could try to describe where to start but I don't want to deliver walls of text (anymore than I usually do). That which is objectively good is discussed as early as Plato's Republic (the Theory of Forms section). I'll be frank while you're being conciliatory, there's very little room for discussion in discussing what aesthetics may determine to be objectively good when someone on the other side has not read preliminary content in aesthetics. This isn't a rag on people who don't read it, because I don't encourage it either, but it's just objectively (heh) difficult if you haven't read Kant, Hume or, more recently, Badiou, Deleuze, Adorno, etc. The most we can do is merely come to the conclusion that we should be discussing art on a level playing field, without any preconceived bias, delineation, or prejudice (in the Gadamer/Heideggerian sense of the term I guess). But even that has proven to be a thorny issue. As I've stated numerous times before, theory is boring. Just like what you like and a discussion on what is objectively "good" should remain in the realm of memes and off handed remarks. |
Yudina said: The problems with explaining concepts that should be kept in classrooms and larger theoretical spheres than on a board about anime. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I'll be frank while you're being conciliatory, there's very little room for discussion in discussing what aesthetics may determine to be objectively good when someone on the other side has not read preliminary content in aesthetics. This isn't a rag on people who don't read it, because I don't encourage it either, but it's just objectively (heh) difficult if you haven't read Kant, Hume or, more recently, Badiou, Deleuze, Adorno, etc. The most we can do is merely come to the conclusion that we should be discussing art on a level playing field, without any preconceived bias, delineation, or prejudice (in the Gadamer/Heideggerian sense of the term I guess). But even that has proven to be a thorny issue. As I've stated numerous times before, theory is boring. Just like what you like and a discussion on what is objectively "good" should remain in the realm of memes and off handed remarks. Basically. I'm willing to discuss (but not debate) taste, that's fine. And it is hard to explain these things to people who don't have the prerequisite knowledge and background that will provide a scaffold for the discussion. Again, I'm not knocking these guys but it is frustrating that they don't know enough about this. There's a scene in Star Trek IV where McCoy asks Spock what it was like being dead. Spock basically tells McCoy he can't discuss this because McCoy never died and thus, they don't share a common frame of reference. That's the position I find myself in quite often outside of the classroom (heck, I sometimes run into it within the classroom, too). I'm not just being conciliatory, though, because even though these guys aren't my students, as someone who has more knowledge it is not my responsibility to lord it over them but to make that knowledge available if they so wish. That's why I think Manaban was right to call me out. It's also why I get frustrated when people pontificate authoritatively about that which they know little. They've already set themselves up to be tremendously resistant to correction and thus propagate false information. This is why I don't mind YouTubers like Gigguk--they entertain but don't make authoritative claims. Meanwhile, other YouTubers like Digibro frustrate me because they do act like authorities when they aren't. |
| Under the Scope, Mother's Basement and Bob Samurai are the only ones I watch... |
"Man always thinks about the past before he dies, as if he were frantically searching for proof that he truly lived." -Jet Black (Cowboy Bebop)  |
DateYutaka said: themegamancave said: Under the Scope, Mother's Basement and Bob Samurai are the only ones I watch... watch pause and select ihes he besy around i say that based not on bing a fan but based on how juronolitisc his videos are prosneted most of them I'll have to check that out. I'm always open to new and interesting youtubers |
"Man always thinks about the past before he dies, as if he were frantically searching for proof that he truly lived." -Jet Black (Cowboy Bebop) |
addioo12 said: He's the kind of anime fan you should strive not to become.To be fair, while gigguk is mostly about comedy, he also has content that goes a bit into the analytical direction. As for digibro, I guess he´s become more of a self-proclaimed expert with a tendency to starting shit and the appearance of a rodent |
| The world is not beautiful - and that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty. -Kino, Kino's Journey My Anime List- http://myanimelist.net/animelist/zealith7 |
Kingbaxter said: Yeah Mothers Basement is great the OP stuff, but he has a tendency to rant about really questionable stuff like that without really making a point or giving sufficient evidence, like with the recent NGNL video, he makes up something interesting about the anime he wants to talk about even though that's the opposite of how you should ideally approach those kind of analysis videos.Mostly that they just get shit wrong and they're supposed to be experts on the subjects. If I hear "dragon ball z was the father of shonen anime" or"evangelion was a deconstruction of gundam" one more time im gonna kill a baby! Furthermore, they tend to be the same beret-wearing elitists with the same ten favorite anime and that "I love anime so much I hate it!" Kind of mentality. To quote a great man "I know you think your moustache is cool!" Maybe I'm nitpicking |
| The world is not beautiful - and that, in a way, lends it a sort of beauty. -Kino, Kino's Journey My Anime List- http://myanimelist.net/animelist/zealith7 |
Fvlminatvs said: @Manaban, I owe you, @ThatCynicalOtaku, @le_halfhand_easy, and @TheBrainInTheJar (from elsewhere) an apology. Also, lots of other people I (by implication) on this thread and forum (like @TripleSRank). Manaban, you delivered a much-needed dose of humility. Yeah, medicine is bitter but sometimes we need it. I let my frustration get the better of me and came off as arrogant and derisive. Although that wasn't my intention, I did it and for that I offer my sincere apologies. Manaban, it is difficult for me to explain the whole subjectivity vs. objectivity in a way that PROVES anything because it is likely that you or most others have read as much on this topic as I have. There is very little philosophy and literary criticism out there that really treats the dichotomy as a debate in the first place. Objectivity and subjectivity are discussed as part of greater overall epistemological discussions. I could point to a ton of authors and I could try to describe where to start but I don't want to deliver walls of text (anymore than I usually do). That which is objectively good is discussed as early as Plato's Republic (the Theory of Forms section). I get frustrated about it because I see it as serving no constructive purpose--indeed, I feel it is destructive. I'm not sure what else to say here. As for Digibro and other anime YouTubers, I don't want them to be super-intellectual like Pause and Select. What I do want them to do is improve. I often watch them and find issues with their reasoning that they wouldn't have. Digibro will oftentimes say something and I'll find myself saying, "Oh, dude, if only you had read this essay or that book, you'd know that what you said is just in error." These guys often err out of ignorance a lot. Like I said elsewhere, Digibro often commits the Affective Fallacy, the opposite of the Intentional Fallacy (aka, "Authorial Intent Fallacy) and if he knew more he could avoid or mitigate it. Frankly, I think Digibro is damn smart. Really damn smart. He's the kind of guy I love having in my classes because he will challenge the hell out of me and I'd be confident he'd come out having learned a ton. He's unrefined, untrained, unpracticed. I see his potential and I am frustrated because I think he could be top tier, a published anime scholar, giving mindblowing insight into the medium and putting anime on the same map of art that film has finally achieved. I could go on about others but I am pressed for time so I have to wrap this post up. I hope that sums up how I feel about a lot of these guys. I hope it also doesn't come off as arrogant. If you guys are still interested, maybe I'll post more later but for now, I probably should just lay low on this discussion. I use the subjective-objective thing very simply. Subjective is what exists inside the subject, and cannot exist without that specific subject. For example, my judgment of an anime cannot exist without myself. Yet the anime still exists so long as any subject is there to perceive it. Subjective things are unique to a specific subject and cannot exist in a different subject. |
| WEAPONS - My blog, for reviews of music, anime, books, and other things |
| Can we keep the posts related to channels and not objectivity versus subjectivity, there are other threads for that discussion |
| >Analyzing Cartoons >"Youtubers" No fucking thanks. |
| I only followed Gigguk because of his Evangelion parody. So, since that hasn't been updated in a while... |
 |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Do you tend to watch newer seasonal shows, or older shows?Akuya - 4 hours ago |
20 |
by AryaVai
»»
2 minutes ago |
|
» Do you find how the anime community finds something to be edgy annoying?vasipi4946 - 4 hours ago |
9 |
by W3TFT
»»
7 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » has the majority of people (here) seen the big 3 ? ( 1 2 3 )ame - Yesterday |
133 |
by Oofmastre9000
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Hentai is the worst anime genre ever created. ( 1 2 )Alpha_1_Zero - 12 hours ago |
55 |
by LostSpectre
»»
20 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » From what side of the neck do you enjoy being bitten by your vampire master?Catalano - 10 hours ago |
13 |
by ColourWheel
»»
50 minutes ago |