word of warning abt the second video. dun watch it if u have a weak heart.

Oh... I thought they weren't available anymore....

I'd advise thinking thru it before watching....  

Not just because of the gore content I mean... 

I think i'm desensitised.

Watching this and typing at the same time, i have to keep reminding myself, that god that did happen, it happenED to someone and that someone is past tense. the chopping of head did make me sit up but i actually found it tad amusing (OMG i'm perverse) when the head is rested on the back of the man...

It's not you.... it's the effect of the hyperreal

hyper-real is the apt term. there is no way else we could have no reaction to the gore in the second video. i was just in shock when i saw it.

so can i question the ethics behind the generation of hyperreality?

 You can question the ethics behind the generation of hyperreality if you like, but do these ethics really exist, or are they only perceived to exist. ie, are they real or are they only perceived to be real.???

Also could it be said that these ethics are real (and without orign), or do they simply exist due to an attempted interreaction with fantasy whilst being totally removed from reality.???

Oops:  *interaction*

long post warning 

hyperreality is the perception of a perceived reality

The Hyperreal (my italics) abolishes the complexities of human acts, it gives them the simplicities of essences, it does away with all dialectics, with any going back beyond what is immediately visible, it organises a world which is without contradictions because it is without depth, a world wide open and wallowing in the evident, it establishes a blissful clarity: things appear to mean something by themselves. (Roland Barthes, Mythologies)

It is possibly unethical because of the way it manupilates our reactions and emotions; at the same time like fantasy it spellbinds us, it is more "exicting" than reality, it is addictive, it makes the mundane everyday real life boring and second class to itself- glorious constructed imageries. I admit i found perhaps the terminator more exciting that the clips above, that i could justify and feel for the imagery characters than for the pple actually executed here (or are they really? hmmm)

My perception of my reality is marred by the shock visuals that i encounter in my daily doings. Ethics are possibly moral ground rules... morals aren't exactly legal determinants... so should we be governed by ethics whilst creating imageries or must we be taught how to disassociate hyperreality from reality and to be trained in correct human responses (like to the clips abv, provided that they are wat thy say they are)

So basically it's about perception and expectation???

Like I expect to be petrified when watching  a Horror movie so I dun get scared but bored. And if I'm watching a Pshychological Thriller and i have no idea what it's about - i get pertrified at bits and perhaps horrified.

I would say it's more about attached meanings aman, not so much expectation. Your expectation of a horror film is the product of a whole set of learnt and associated meanings with genre, part experiences etc...

And mudflower, I was referring to Baudrillard's hyperreal - it refers to the role that the mass media plays in creating our 'realities'. Societies are being bombarded with images of themselves, which create a hyperreal condition: more real that the real. Hand in hand with this is the simulacra - signs which are copies of other signs. Baudrillard theorises that simulacra has hijacked the real; in fact, it comes before the real, becoming the real itself. Simulations (images, videos etc) no longer to real objects, people etc. They only refer to each other.

Basically, what I think it means is that when we see a sign (a media product) we do not refer it to 'concrete realities'. The sign (in this case the clip) itself refers to another sign, (a violent scene in a movie etc) instead of  the actual violence done by one person to another...

It is a very pessimistic view of our world, and it also brings into question what reality is, or what we think the real is... 

I'm not sure there can be an ethics of the hyperreal, since each simulation refers back only to others....

It is not something controlled, intentional or responsible - so how can ethics come into it? 

It is a very pessimistic view of our world, and it also brings into question what reality is, or what we think the real is... 

I agree. Sad but agree.

I think our generation has began to see the effects of the hyperreal interferring with the publics perceptions and their perceived realities.

That's it in a nutshell 'mudflower.'

I agree. Sad but agree.

Remember that this is just one of many theories.... it isn't the defining one...

These things are too complicated to be described by just one overarching theory 

Honestly i would like to have a response when i see the clip abv not subconciously trying to compare it with hyperreality (more real than real) visuals that i previously encounter... I dislike having a reaction to simulacra than realities

I think that there is a difference in not relating/reacting to something you've watched on a screen, and not reacting to something that happens in real time infront of you.

The thing is, there can be many other factors for not reacting to that clip... the quality of the video, the fact that it happened a world away to someone I don't identify with etc... maybe what I'm essentially trying to say is... this is just one instance... it's not a big deal 

Can you have ethics for an attempted interaction with fantasy??

That's an interesting one.... esp since I suscribe to the face-to-face version of ethics.  

Also, I suppose, in many ways, that is the issue we face in an environment such as this one (online conversations). What can one ground ethics on in a virtual land?

  What can one ground ethics on in a virtual land?

 A very good question $deezee$, what indeed.

So do things really exist in a virtual land, and if they do not, are they fantasy? and if we interact with this fantasy, are we becoming removed from reality, and if we are, are we entering into the realms of hyperreality.??

....Now i'm confusing myself.....  

hahahah

It's pretty simple to me... no matter which virtual space I am in, I keep in mind that my typed words reach some real eyes...

I extend the face-to-face thing my constantly keeping the 'other' in mind 

I mean, ultimately, there would be no virtual without real ppl contributing would there?

 It's all right for you, but don't forger that i've only got two neuron's left.

and one just typed forger

Two neurons??

typed forger??

wha????

 Oops:.....*forget*

bet you haven't

ahhhhh....

so what's with the two neurons? 

go and do some real work dee, you're deliberately confuzzling yourself

No!! Unconfuzzle me first!

No sure if I'm enlightened after watching those videos but couldn't help myself. Makes me angry people in this world that don't respect life. 

it's usually angry people that don't

so what's with the two neurons? 

Drinking alcohol destroys neuron's.

you're just trying to keep a certain interaction going

evermore

ahhhh

you've got 'mother hen syndrome'

by you i mean dee-the-hopeful

yeah.... cos otherwise, no one talks to me

hehehe

now everyone HAS to talk to you

kekekekeke

uhhhh.... I think it's the opposite heller...

or at least read you

how is it the opposite??

I have to talk to everyone

Y4?

Cos I'm nice

no you're not

you're absoluterferkinsplendiferous

Ok.... cos I have a cute devil avatar?

hahahaha I'm hoping that's a veiled compliment

and a real little devil with a feather in your hand

Yesh... the quill is mightier than the canon

sadly true

Saddam was really evil. Though that video didn't spook me or anything, I'm glad that Saddam is dead. Got off way too easy I think. Should have tortured him and then put some explosives in his ass and let it rip!

Actually, whlist I don't believe that Iraq should have been invaded in the first place, I did believe that the invaders had an obligation to sort out the mess they created.  Seeing Saddam's hanging on youtube, with the original dialogue, has convinced me that the invaders should just cut and run.  What was supposed to be a judicial process under the rule of law was a partisan lynching by a group of partisan thugs.  No more of our sons and daughters should risk their lives to prop up this regime.

Time to go, I say. 

Oh, but that's great, we screwed everything up, now let's just drop everything and run.

We screwed everything up ridiculously over in Iraq. We can't just leave our problems hanging. It was a bad idea to go in the first place, but now that we have, and have created problems, it's almost an obligation for us to fix these problems.

the waters a little deep here

it's almost an obligation for us to fix these problems.

But that's the thing - you can't fix centuries' worth of animosity.... not unless you were willing to commit for another 10 yrs 

We can't pull out now - we are in to deep and it would be worse if everyone just packed up and left.  The country has to be restored to order - and it will take time and effort.

 Iraq has never been in order, ever since it was artificially created after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. 1918.

There has been continued strife in the region since the 16th century. (and before).

 Why do we think that we can solve a problem that has existed for centuries??

Obviously they didn't comtemplate the reality of the situation before they went in guns a-blazin

  Obviously!!

And obviously President Shrub didn't help things with his cowboy mentality and his "bring it on" attitude.

So true - there is a Thousand Year Religous War there.  It is very sad - life began there, or so history and religion has told us.  We can't go and think that we can change the world to "our" ways.  But it is hard in our day and time to think that their still is such evil people as Saddam and his followers.  Though we have more information today through media then we ever have had in the past we are still not given all the details and we are only given what the government wants to let us know.  

I just don't see a way to fix these deeply rooted problems.  The religious wars have gone on for years, and 20K more US troops are not going to solve the problem.  I don't like 'cut and run' anymore than anyone else, but I don't see a viable exit strategy, other than partition into Sunni, Shia and Kurdish areas that are self governing.  The kurds, if you can believe the media, are already governing themselves reasonably well,so maybe that would work.

We're in a hole here, and the first law of holes is "Stop Digging". 

I will say that it was not right for us to go in and try to change the life that the is lead in Iraq.  I know that Bush had to do what he had to do back then because of the attacks on our land.  It was terrifing and horrible and was a wake up call of what could be the States did not step up to the plate at the time (though it was not Saddam who lead the attacks).  My brother in law was at the Pentagon at the time of the attacks and I for one do not wish anyone to go through what we went through or anyone out there that lost someone that was dear to them.  I have to thank our soldiers for fighting for our freedom and to protect our land.  I will say though I don't know if there ever will be a "good time" to just pull out - 

so when would be the right time - there really isn't any is there, and we can't go on like we are.

Bush didn't have to do what he did.... he had an opportune moment,  and he took it.

They'd have to stay there for another 4-8 yrs with loads more troops I'm thinking... Cos the conflict is gonna spread thru the region. And the opposing iraqi/arabic/muslims might just decided to unite against the US. 

Basically, things ain't gonna get better for Bush and the next pres...

I really wonder why anyone would run for presidency this time!  

Well, as hard as it someone has to take over.  When Bush first attacked Iraq I made the statement he went over to finish what his father started.  Though Saddam was a bad man it was Osama we were after and it was Osama that attacked us.  There are so many what ifs and do this and that - I still believe that Bush put us way over the top and he can't find the way home for the troops now.  I think that the democrats will hold office next run and to tell you the truth it is slim pickin's for the next "leader

I'd like it to be Obama.... just so that we can watch newscasters and political commentators etc getting tongue tied with that other name

Beats being Osama any day...

8 yr old dies trying to demonstrate how Saddam died

oops 

10 kids so far!! Power of news!!

Parents need to monitor what their children watch and if they allow it they need to talk about it and stress not copy it.  Come on 10 children.....

That's pretty sad.

What is the world coming to?

And Saddam keeps killing....

Even in death he is evil.

I'm not blaming him on this one - it's completely on the media and the parents.

Correct but it was the "show" of Saddam that instigated the events

I think maybe the kids shouldn't have been able to see it

I agree 10,000%

Then don't allow kids on the net or buy them a mobile phone.

My kid's not gonna have a phone till it's 30!

And the net? Forget abt it...

Has no parent heard of Net Nanny?

What's Net Nanny?

I thought the same thing about the cell phone till my daughter took a trip to DC with an honors program - we got her a phone right away so she could call us at anytime.  The net - well teach your children correct and hope for the best.   Katrina my oldest is 13 and she hasn't gone on anything she shouldn't (yes we do check).......I wish I didn't have a cell phone sometimes myself - wonder if my mother will take it away.  LOL

My mum gave me a earful when I got my first mobile.... at age 18 or 19 I think it was

 Did it work??

Did what work?

 The lecture your mother gave you. (did it help)

Oh.... no.... I'd gotten it on a 18mth plan

two years later, it was me who regretted getting it.... being reached anywhere anytime (by your parents) is not all it's cracked up to me

to BE

 I imagine they were only looking after your wellbeing.

 My immediate family and about 2 close friends are the only ones that have my mobile number, so when it rings I always know who to expect.

The only way I can screen my calls is if they're from overseas.... the number shows up as 'private number'

Which  means that it doesn't matter who it could be, private numbers are to be avoided 

 So you don't answer them then??

 hehehehe

yeah

oi...what if i decide to call u one day???

You'd have to gamble on my mood....

I am on my cell more than my home - I often think I work out of my car instead of my home.  I am always on the go - thank goodness for ear pieces.