I chose attention with this important modification. Many (not all) of these folks desperately need to draw attention to their Intelligence. There's a certain ethic these types prescribe to, and that is you're not intelligent unless you criticize something. In the worldview of most of these adherents, the opposite is also true: those who praise something, follow a tradition, or otherwise fail to criticize a product or concept are stupid. In many quarters, the manner in which one lays out the critique is itself the all-important sign of intelligence, of course making the act of criticizing essential.
The mistake here is obvious. Intelligent critical thinking can actually lead to praise of a concept, argument, or even a product like a computer game. One need not be critical to be a critical thinker.
This theory is of course not limited to computer game board posters; other notable practitioners include TV newscasters and newspaper reporters.
BTW, this does not mean that all criticism of CIV3 must be dismissed as negative prattling. It's just that most critiques found on this board give the reader the impression that the author is simply not disposed to offer even faint or partial praise for a product that most consider to be of high quality.
The mistake here is obvious. Intelligent critical thinking can actually lead to praise of a concept, argument, or even a product like a computer game. One need not be critical to be a critical thinker.
This theory is of course not limited to computer game board posters; other notable practitioners include TV newscasters and newspaper reporters.
BTW, this does not mean that all criticism of CIV3 must be dismissed as negative prattling. It's just that most critiques found on this board give the reader the impression that the author is simply not disposed to offer even faint or partial praise for a product that most consider to be of high quality.
Comment