I heard a mention of #ConorMcGregor, so I went to read a bit about him, and watched a few minutes of a couple #UFC fights — including that knockout 13 seconds into the match.
Change my mind: if you enjoy watching #MMA, there's something wrong with you.
It is brutal. Am I too sensitive?
@tripu I would not say too sensitive, but not precise enough.
"something wrong with you" is a pretty broad term. I find it problematic to value brutal fights, even if they are fought by rules. But the way you say it, i could agree or disagree depending on the interpretation.
I think paying or encouraging someone to do things that cause severe injury should be a crime. This shit and boxing and American football should not exist.
I am very, very reluctanct to ban anything like that, my default being to err on the side of freedom for consenting adults to do whatever they please.
I'm just surprised that so many people seem to like MMA so much.
(I know it's not the same, I know there are a few important differences, but) it feels to me like bullfighting: I can't understand how someone could enjoy watching _that_.
>" am very, very reluctanct to ban anything like that, my default being to err on the side of freedom for consenting adults to do whatever they please."
Not long ago, I had that exact same position. Let people make their own choices. But I've begun to evolve that position.
If someone with better information, experience, or intelligence knowingly leads someone else to harm themselves, then they are responsible for that harm.
E.g., there is a glass of Koolaid on the table and I know that a third party has put poison in the Koolaid. Another person walks in and I tell them, "Here's some Koolaid for you, drink up."
That's a crime. Many of these situations are like that. They may even disclose that there is poison in the Koolaid, but then dismiss the danger and show many other people drinking it and gaining fame and fortune or whatever, or using other psychological techniques to get them to drink it anyway.
Case #2: Drugs. Everyone knows that smoking tobacco will harm you. Yet millions of people around the world still smoke their first cigarette each year. Why? Because other people with more experience, knowledge and skill use a combination of psychological techniques to trick those naive people into harming themselves.
There are many other analogies along the lines of someone with superior information or experience who can lead others into harming themselves.
@Pat @tripu I would add that while this is true, banning little things (-> individual choice involved) that bring some pleasure (no matter how hard it is to understand how or why) to some would have a major ethical problem.
As long as we cannot make notable progress on big things (no or nearly no individual choice: usage of fossil fuels, generally the stuff that drives the climate collapse), it would be unfair. Important here: these "big things" are not bringing joy to most people, only harm.
Sure, it would be realistic to, say, ban smoking and boxing. But it would be quite dystopian to ban those things while not making progress on the others.
