Sisi Qiu
Enl213
2/10/15
A Critique of Why We Need Violent Video Game
Introduction and thesis:
After the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, many people start to blame video game for gun crime. They think video game is the crime culprit for nation’s blood lust. However, the author Ethan point out violent video games won’t be a reason for killing. In the contract, He suggest that video games can be an outlet for people’s aggression. But Ethan has insufficient evidence to proof his point and he has some illogical statement in the article.
Summary:
In the article“Why we need violent game” Ethan Gilsdorf point out many people and association blame violent game can be a reason for nation’s blood lust. However, Ethan argues that violent game won’t build killers. By playing violent in video games can keep the crime rate low. Moreover, he thinks violent video games might be the best outlet for powerless men who want to release their anger. The author states people need these visceral, adrenaline- rich experience to fulfill people’s mental needs. It’s the reason why those games sell so well.
Analysis:
In the beginning of the article, Ethan writes“…pundits, parents and media have jumped on video game violence as a possible scapegoat.”In this sentence, he doesn’t mention video game violence is a scapegoat for what and he didn't have direct evidence to prove the killing is not related to playing violent video game. “Scapegoat” might leads the reader to think that violent video games are innocent. And I find in Craig A. Anderson and Brad J. Bushman’s report“Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature”violent video games can be a big reason for people to commit a crime since it will increase people’s aggressive behavior. So what Ethan writes it’s not a fair statement.
In the later paragraph, Ethan states...