Interesting discussion.

[Bugz]

Here's where you're going wrong. In any comparison, you cannot simply remove part of the equation to suit your outcome. Here, the "inexchangable unique kid" part is an integral part of the problem. You simply cannot compare a game that gets old after 3 months of playing to something that'll last a lifetime, with all responsibilities etc.

Yes you can

Say we have a graph of the utility & pleasure of a game and baby from the moment of deciding to have one to when the kid leaves home at 18 and the life of a game from the release date being announced (or beta or whatever) and the point at which you complete it. We simply scale if needed and I guess, in mathematical terms, integrate between limits to find the utility of a certain period.

Toht stated this period in his first post: "A waits for a kid for 2 years. Tries and tries, no go, and finally that one day they find out that she's pregnant." & "He hears that in two years, "Megakill 3000 - Extra kill!" is coming out. He waits and waits, speculates, writes on forums, draws fan arts, and finally that day comes and he gets the game."

Now his explaination is a bit sloppy above but anyone can see that our range is 2 years.

Why can't we cut off the rest of our utility graph and just focus on that bit? In fact - we can.

 

[fl3a]

we cant because we are discussing human emotions, which we cannot successfully and objectively quantify (we cant say this baby here gives 100 pleasure units, the game gives 200 pleasure units). the expectation and pleasure is in both cases deeply connected with what the person imagines happening in the future in regards to what they are waiting for.

as part of the reason for the whole expectation and pleasure derived from eventually recieving what they were waiting for includes, in some part, their ideas of what will happen with it in the future (teaching your baby to talk, fragging insane amounts of people in megakill 3000) have an effect on how much they expect something.

if we were to cut out the future aspirations of both cases it would throw the equation out of whack and we would have to remove more aspects to balance them, until we were at 'baby vs game - which is cooler?'

 

[Bugz]

You can't accurately create an equation based on human emotions etc. that will satisfy both scenarios in expected happiness, previous happiness etc. Or you can but it would be a lot of work that will be hard to generalize due to the problem of opinion and individual circumstances.

The closest you can get is a utility function.

If you don't accept that - then you are arguing in the realms of opinion. In which case - Toht's opinion is no more wrong than right.

 

[Calaen]

You can make everything feel the same if you remove the identity of each object which is in fact what you are doing buggz.

You can't just remove human emotion, from the baby scenario yet still imply that the guy waiting for a game feels the same way as the wannabe parents.

Well you can as you have, but it does not take away from the fact that comparing the two things are stupid.

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

You may not be able to make an equation that's accurately up to 3 digits behind the decimal separator, but you can certainly make a global approximation, and the fact of the matter is that the importance and emotional weight of the object has a great deal of influence on the anticipation towards this, and no matter if it's the geekiest of all people, the weight and importance of a game that'll be old after 3 months anyway, is multitudes less than that of a kid.

Trying to leave out the object is to (engineering analog coming) try and state something like:
"Well, I've got a box here, and I need to lift it." without specifying if said box contains a dozen fluffy pillows, or a heavy 20 Tonnes sheet metal press. You'll need some different equipment for either case.

 

[fl3a]

Each individual has a utility function for certain things. It just may be that the nerds' utility fuction for gaming produces the same level of utility as the man and woman having a baby.

i agree with this, its basically what i said in my first post (some people might replace the basic want for offspring with a want for something else). i have nothing against an utility function, other than the fact how it cant be completed. as you say:

Say we have a graph of the utility & pleasure of a game and baby from the moment of deciding to have one to when the kid leaves home at 18 and the life of a game from the release date being announced (or beta or whatever) and the point at which you complete it. We simply scale if needed and I guess, in mathematical terms, integrate between limits to find the utility of a certain period.

this is where the mistake arises. we cant cut off a part of the graph due to the beginning of the graph only making sense when the whole of it is there. its the same case for both the utility value of the game and the baby.
as i havent studied utility calculating method, from what i understand it is a more complete and scientific approach similar to bentham's felicific calculus, and it has similar pitfalls, especially when applied to something not quantifiable such as human emotions, which are under discussion here. thats where i am coming from.

 

[Thorwyn]

Why can't we cut off the rest of our utility graph and just focus on that bit? In fact - we can.

You can certainly do that. But I think you need to be very careful with making any conclusions from that other than "yep, both examples contain happyness". There is no indicator for the importance of the two events, which is what Toht was asking for.

 

[Bugz]

The effort required in creating a global approximation of the emotional happiness, the future expected happiness (which has to be plotted against fears or dispair etc.) and the previous happiness (which is then going to be based off adaptive expectations etc.) would be extreme.

As such - I'm suggesting a utility function.

It's true it's not the best indicator but for a discussion like this, in the way toht presented it, with a finite period of time of 2 years I think it is reasonable.

It was my 2 cents anyway and a different stance on it. I personally believe having a kid DOES bring you more happiness etc. than a game and I agree that the benefits of a kid can run from when your 20 years old and he is still in the womb to the point when your 85 years old and his about to earn his OAP bus pass!

 

[Bugz]

Edit - A better solution to my problem may be to somehow isolate long term & short term happiness in both of these scenarios. I have no idea how you would do that but I imagine it'd require a psychologist's view .

edit2 - or even better - cumulative utility - then you really could work within 2 limits (although obviously still losing out on expected future utility/happiness).

 

[old.Tohtori]

Regarding the graph, we can say that both have equal values of expectations;

A parents desire is increased with the future of the baby, bringing it up etc.

A gamers desire is increased with the features of the game, "pwning" in it etc.

As such the "pre-release"(fits a baby too) variables are in the same line IF the expectations are the same.

If we cut it down, we can compare every aspect of baby waiting to correlate with game waiting, only thing that changes is the value of individual persons.

For example;

- Mother has 5 points of "raising kid" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "playing game" value.
- Mother has 5 points of "hoping baby is healthy" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "hoping game is good" value.

And so on.

This requires the person to realise that some people don't feel as strongly about babies and can feel as strongly about other things.

 

[Bugz]

That approach isn't simplifying the problem or trying to solve part of it. It's creating values to make the problem easier. It's a bit of a shady area to be honest without evidence as backup.

The integral problem of this discussion is normalization. Utility functions can't really work on expectations nor abstract values such as human emotion (as flea rightly pointed out).

We can either use a utility function for the utility of that present moment (and ignore all the expectations of the past & present - or at least try to use the past expectations in some way) or some other way flea/ingafgrinn suggests.

The problem comes in if you say "- Mother has 5 points of "hoping baby is healthy" value." How is this value calculated? Is the mother basing it off the predictions of her other babies? Or is she basing it on hope? Does she know what diseases/mutations her genes may carry onto the baby etc.

We can say 'playing this game for 10 minutes gives me 5 utility and holding this baby in my arms for the first time gives me 5 utility' and plot the utility over time based on this. But that's about it really.

 

[Calaen]

Regarding the graph, we can say that both have equal values of expectations;

A parents desire is increased with the future of the baby, bringing it up etc.

A gamers desire is increased with the features of the game, "pwning" in it etc.

As such the "pre-release"(fits a baby too) variables are in the same line IF the expectations are the same.

If we cut it down, we can compare every aspect of baby waiting to correlate with game waiting, only thing that changes is the value of individual persons.

For example;

- Mother has 5 points of "raising kid" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "playing game" value.
- Mother has 5 points of "hoping baby is healthy" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "hoping game is good" value.

And so on.

This requires the person to realise that some people don't feel as strongly about babies and can feel as strongly about other things.

fucking lol

 

[Ingafgrinn Macabre]

Regarding the graph, we can say that both have equal values of expectations;

A parents desire is increased with the future of the baby, bringing it up etc.

A gamers desire is increased with the features of the game, "pwning" in it etc.

As such the "pre-release"(fits a baby too) variables are in the same line IF the expectations are the same.

If we cut it down, we can compare every aspect of baby waiting to correlate with game waiting, only thing that changes is the value of individual persons.

For example;

- Mother has 5 points of "raising kid" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "playing game" value.
- Mother has 5 points of "hoping baby is healthy" value.
- Gamer has 5 points of "hoping game is good" value.

And so on.

This requires the person to realise that some people don't feel as strongly about babies and can feel as strongly about other things.

This requires the person te realize that some people don't feel as strongly about games and can feel as strongly about other things.

 

[soze]

This is pointless its personal my gf is not pregnant i care more about my twix that i do about babies. If she became pregnant my view would change. There is no right and wrong.

 

[Marc]

I have no idea what this "discussion" is about.

 

[Calaen]

I doubt anyone really does, but I took an oath to stand strong against shit internet posts

 

[old.Tohtori]

fucking lol

What's "fucking lol" about it? You always do this, think i have something against precious babies

(Also to Bugz); It's just a comparison of things that would be of equal value to person feeling as strongly about different things.

So the mother feels 5 points worth and the gamer feels the same level.

This requires the person te realize that some people don't feel as strongly about games and can feel as strongly about other things.

Yes? I never claimed people can't feel strongly about having babies, now did i? I never claimed babies are less then games or that i'd feel more strongly about getting a game then having a child.

I think you'll find it's the other way around.

 

[Zita]

Mmmm, who cares? ;o

 

[Aoami]

You can't accurately create an equation based on human emotions etc. that will satisfy both scenarios in expected happiness, previous happiness etc. Or you can but it would be a lot of work that will be hard to generalize due to the problem of opinion and individual circumstances.

Therefore it's a fucking stupid discussion, not an interesting one.

 

[adoNix]

Therefore it's a fucking stupid discussion, not an interesting one.

word

 

[DocWolfe]

And your suprised Considering who posted this, I'd say it's been a while since he caused an argument!!

Only he would compare the expectations dreams a couple has of wanting a child to some geek waiting for a computer game.

Good point...

 

[Calaen]

I'm gonna take you to the gay bar

I don't care that you don't like kids or don't want them or whatever, just stop using them in your stupid fucking discussion. Yes I can get on the parental high horse, because as someone who has been tere and done it, I know for 100% fact you can't possibly compare anything to it, because you don't know what it actually feels like.

So please give more negative rep you raging homo.

 

[Shagrat]

You cant assign "points" to the various aspects of parenting, I just cant work out how anyone can think like that.

I've experienced quite a lot in life and I can say that the 2 children I've had and the "completely different" experiences I've had with the two of them are completely unique experiences that I couldnt compare with anything else I've experienced.

What's next, a comparison of raising a child in real life to raising one in the Sims 3?

If you wanted to use something from rl to compare with the expectation of waiting for a game, then having a child was a fucking stupid one to pick, and was always going to push the thread in the direction its gone in.

 

[Lethul]

this was interesting

 

[old.Tohtori]

I don't care that you don't like kids or don't want them or whatever, just stop using them in your stupid fucking discussion. Yes I can get on the parental high horse, because as someone who has been tere and done it, I know for 100% fact you can't possibly compare anything to it, because you don't know what it actually feels like.

So please give more negative rep you raging homo.

What a great parent, do teach your kid that attitude too *clap* Raging homo, well put, very mature and parental.

And no, i won't stop, i can use what-ever-the-hell i want in my examples.

Oh and...thought it was you who said "Can't know stuff for 100%", well whoopdidoo, double-standards. Big le surprise.

This would've been an interesting discussion to those who don't get on high horses and can discuss things, but hey, why let others discuss what they want when you can barge in waving fingers and throwing insults that have NOTHING to do with the thread.

F*cks sake...sometimes you people really can be annoying.

As a final notion, i'd like someone, ANYONE to show me where i said; "kids are less then games" or perhaps "kids aren't important" or even, hell, "liking kids is wrong" or to anything in that ballpark.

Anyone?

If not, next time you feel like judging me for ruining a thread, call a prosthetic limb company to get a leg to stand on.

 

[CorNokZ]

F*cks sake...sometimes you people really can be annoying.

...

 

[liloe]

Hm, may I add one little thing nobody mentioned up till now? =)

Basically if you want a scientific answer representing the average human attitude towards that question you have to take a number X of candidates who are in this situation and measure the amount of endorphins in their body every day/week over the said amount of 2 years.
The more people you get, the better your results will be.

<-- big break here -->

Now my 2 cents to the rest of the discussion. The fanaticism, with which some people dismiss other opinions over a 100% subjective topic (children) is highly amusing.

Personally I hate children. They're loud, take lots of time and once I'm done with studying I rather want to get a nice job with good payment than having children. School and uni was shit enough so I don't feel the urge to produce something that has to live the same stuff again. I want my personal freedom. I want to go out when I want to and most important of all: I'm not gonna clean some baby ass or whatever Cats are so much cuter and take care for themselves. I like cats =)

Now that's 100% my opinion and I live quite happily with it. I don't laugh about others who chose to have children, I still talk to them, I don't make jokes (well, maybe an "it was your decision" when they complain ), etc. … you get the picture.

Now hundreds of people will jump on me for my oh so bad opinion, but hey, wouldn't it be much worse if I actually did have children with this attitude?

But hey, as Thor already said: That question is deeply philosophical. Being born is something you cannot decide for yourself. You cannot choose the "final" date when you die as well, but at least you have the opportunity to kill yourself. There is no way for you to choose to "stay unborn".

Damn, that would've been a cool discussion ^^

EDIT: Yes, I know that I can be quite rational and cold, but hey, that's the way I am =)

 

[noblok]

Basically if you want a scientific answer representing the average human attitude towards that question you have to take a number X of candidates who are in this situation and measure the amount of endorphins in their body every day/week over the said amount of 2 years.
The more people you get, the better your results will be.

That would make sense if all we were interested in were endorphins or 'pleasurable experiences'. I'm not. Certainly not in wanting to have children. Having children seems valuable in itself and that's the reason why I want it. I don't just want children for the pleasurable experience that come with it. I want them for themselves.

(Obviously the joy you get out of it isn't completely unimportant, but there is much more to it than that.)

 

[Calaen]

stuff

Nothing wrong with not wanting children at all, for the first 7 years of my relationship with my wife, we did not want to have any kids, so we could travel, and enjoy our own company before bringing something else into the relationship. The problem is as someone like yourself who does not want or enjoy children you could not make a true statment about how much someone who has been trying for a child feels when they eventually discover they are going to get one.

Of course you could have an opinion of what you feel someone would feel like, but if you then get 100% of the parents telling you that you are wrong and it is something even they cannot describe, you would probably realise it's a wasted exercise.

 

[Calaen]

NERD RAGE

No I said you can't 100% know you won't ever change your mind. I am saying I know 100% you cannot know how a wannabe parent feels when they discover they could be having one. Unless ofc you break your own rule and change your mind......