Vesko wrote:There is only a difference in direct or indirect responsibility, and there is no difference in the degree of responsibility?? Do you realise that no court of law would be possible to operate if that were true?
Yes, I am fully aware of that. A couple of centuries ago I probably would have been killed for saying such an thing.
Vesko wrote:Could you please elaborate how on the basis of the sole observation that there are people who use drugs without ever seeing such a show, you conclude it clearly indicates that drug usage has little to do with such shows?
The only thing these shows are doing is presenting people with more posibilities. For instance, by claming how easy it is for someone to buy drugs. However, the final motivation for buying and eventually using drugs lies much deeper. And from my own observations, on myself and people around me, it is due to some desire. Ofcourse the whole thing is very complex and depends on the user, but it generally has to do with the desire for happiness, for acceptence, for existence, for love, for power, for completeness, etc., etc. and usually a mixture of all that. So the thing the show does is bringing up a latent desires in people, and it are those desires which makes us do things. But even without such shows, these desires will come up eventually.
Vesko wrote:I think we have been talking about the same things here. I was trying to make a point that educational programmes can provide the confrontation in a better way, presenting all known facts before the audience, unlike confrontation in chat shows that in no way can present all the facts, simply because it is, by definition, a light informal talk show.
Yes, an educational program confronts it in a different way. But don't say better. For they have not yet solved the problem. This is due to less interest in these programs, specially by people who in fact have suchs problems. Those people tend to be less acadamic and favor light informal talk shows above intellectual shows. Therein lies the problem, there probably is a solution, but no one is listening.
Vesko wrote:I know of similar experiments with the brain to what you have mentioned. Does what you refer to incapacitate the person in some other perceptible way?
No, amazingly these people have instantly solved there addiction at the moment the lesion is made. No nasty side-effects or incapabilities (at least, not more then previously.) There was one down side, although I can't quite remember it. I can look it up for you if you wish, or you could just buy the book :p. "Zen and the brain" by "James Austin".
Vesko wrote:Can give me an example how do you propose to deal with the problem? I am asking, because one way of dealing with the problem is summoning all the experts who are well acquainted with the undisputable dangers of drugs -- and there are a number of such experts at this moment, and use their expert knowledge to exert control over the TV. At the moment, this is clearly not done sufficiently, and it is a great way to "deal with it".
Just like you can't start the problem by TV you can't solve it either. Ohh, you can save a few perhapse, but definitly not all. First you have to understand the cause of the problem before you can solve it. You cannot solve drug abuse if you don't solve the underlying problem (similar to western medicine which only solve the symptoms but not the decease.)
I do not have the time now, nor the willpower, to explain how to deal with drugs. One solution would be for us all to reach enlightenment, but since that is not going to happen,at least not soon, solutions are far, far away.
I suggest you simply accept drugs. Let these people figure it out themselves. It is the best solution.
Vesko wrote:The context is, of course, not entirely known, but the major parts of it are. We do not know who exactly and what is the exact number of people who are going to watch it, but we know that there is a large TV audience that regularly watches such shows. I have read all of my previous posts -- please point to where I assume that the show, or such shows, are going to be bad for all who watch them. I have done no such thing.
I am sorry for that. My mistake. I only assumed that, due to your vigorous anti-statements :p, you would have such a point of view. Again, my mistake.
Vesko wrote:First, there is drug abuse, then it is on TV... and then, can not TV compound the drug abuse by misinforming the public about the real dangers of drugs?
No, the TV show, or anything, can only provoke in people what is already there. If you have a desire then I can lure you, however, if you desire none, I cannot lure you.
Vesko wrote:Personally, I would not call TV a smooth reflective surface that does a remarkable job. I would call it a reflective surface (a mirror) that severely distorts an already ugly reality, doing a very poor job.
Yes, but that distortion is part of the ugly reality.
Vesko wrote:So whenever there is an disgusting program on TV, that disgusting program is an actual respresentation of ourselves. And it is not the TV nor the producers which need 'fixing', it is us who need it.
So we (us) need fixing, but the producers and the TV they produce do not need fixing? Are not TV producers part of us?
Ahh yes ofcourse, you get what I mean, solve all problems individually and you solve all problems globally.
Don't read my signature.