Is it immoral to enjoy violence in entertainment?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alterum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Your real question, “what can I get away with?”

(reference to violent cartoons, etc.)
Is not a good one, and no way to live your life. It is an
unanswerable question except by God.
Do not ask what bad you can do, but rather what good.

You see the opinions of humans do not always agree, even
humans that follow Christ. Ask how you can please Him,
not what you can get away with, and He will tell you Himself.
 
40.png
cheeto1:
Your real question, “what can I get away with?” … Ask how you can please Him,not what you can get away with, and He will tell you Himself.
I am already quite certain what is and is not acceptable.
My point has to do with what types of violence actually fit into what catagory. I simply will not make a blanket statement of violence when I can see different degrees and circumstances that change the morality involved.

Perhaps I should take a different approach to illustrate the point.
Is alcohol consumption wrong? No.
Is excessive alcohol consumption wrong? Yes.

Is eating food wrong? No.
Is eating to excess wrong? Yes, it is called gluttony.

Is missing Mass wrong? Yes
Is missing Mass due to circumstances beyond your control wrong? No.

In each case, the action being taken is the same at any given point in time. The circumstances, and the degree dictate the morality of the action.

So…
Is enjoyment of _____ violence wrong? No.
Is enjoyment of _____ violence wrong? Yes.
Fill in the blanks. I do not understand why people do not want there to be a difference. But I see a big difference.
I know where I draw the line.
Perhaps everyone else draws the same line somewhere along the way without even realizing it. But in attempting to show where my line is wrong, they paint ALL violence as being the same.
But all violence is not the same.

Z
 
This doesn’t change my answer whatsoever.

Who decides how much you personally should drink?
– God. Not you, not someone else’s opinion

Who decides how much you should eat?
– God. Not you, not someone else’s opinion

Who decides when you should miss mass?
– God. Not you, not someone else’s opinion

You are inviting danger on yourself and this is why. If someone
here were to tell you where to draw the line, God may not agree,
and yet you would justify yourself because someone agreed with
you. No one can tell you where to draw the line.

Remember that rich young man who asked Jesus what he must
do to be saved? You can tell God you’ve followed all the
commandments, but when He looks intently at you like He did
the rich young man, He will tell you what you need. What if the
man had asked a group of friends instead, and they told him,
“you are already doing everything right”. You can get other
people’s opinions, but they can’t get you to heaven. There is One
whose opinion is necessary.
 
vz71:

I usually shy away from anologies, has I’m not good at them. They always seem to do the opposite and take away focus from the point in my case, and seem to bait other threads. For that I aplogise.

As a lay person, I try to explain it in a way I understand it and I probably don’t do great job there either.

The remainder doesn’t come from me, and perhaps the labels fit any one of these people who are simply, at least in spirit, have good intent. I suppose one could make presumptions that since they are Scribes and Doctors of the Church, they have at least moderately acceptable credentials that they know what they are talking about.

As your implication that I should “examine the size of the plank in my eye”, your correct, and that is a daily struggle for me, and I thank you for the reminder.

So I’m sorry if I presented a less than perfect answer for your question.

Andy
 
40.png
vz71:
Is enjoyment of _____ violence wrong? No.
Is enjoyment of _____ violence wrong? Yes.
Fill in the blanks. I do not understand why people do not want there to be a difference. But I see a big difference.
I know where I draw the line.
Perhaps everyone else draws the same line somewhere along the way without even realizing it. But in attempting to show where my line is wrong, they paint ALL violence as being the same.
But all violence is not the same.

Z
I think you missed my previous attempt to address the type of violence most objectionable. I did not try to categorize all types of violence as equally offensive.
Now, the kind of violence I think that most of us here find objectionable, is the kind that portrays suffering, whether physical or emotional, that is inflicted upon another human being for it’s own sake. That is what is gratuitous.
As far as catagories and subcatagories, I think that line of questioning is completely missing the point. We’re talking about violence in any catagory against human beings that is gratuitous.
Now, if you’re still wanting to hang on to violence of any other type, I guess you could still watch, for instance, a lot of expolsions, and car crashes…but that still is between you and God, no one could tell you for sure that it would be appropriate, it is a matter of conscience. But as the Church teaches, conscience has to be informed, not just left to it’s own device, because we have a flawed nature.

The point that most of us are trying to make here is that violence has a tendency over time to desensitize us to cruelty. You can argue all you want that one type of violence is acceptable even if another is not, but one type will *inevitably lead to the craving * to go to the next level. Lust of any nature works in that fashion, it promotes cravings. And the craving for violence is just that, a type of lust. You can argue until you’re blue in the face, it doesn’t change the nature of that beast.

And I don’t think anyone here is trying to attack you personally for your beliefs about this. If you have taken anything I have written personally, I sincerely apologize, it was not my intent. I do get somewhat passionate when in these types of discussions. :o

We’re ultimately trying to have a discussion about what the nature of gratuitous violence is at any level and it’s inherent dangers to the human spirit, i.e., it’s morality.

God Bless,
Jeanette
 
40.png
cheeto1:
You are inviting danger on yourself and this is why. If someonehere were to tell you where to draw the line, God may not agree,and yet you would justify yourself because someone agreed withyou. No one can tell you where to draw the line…
Well at least we can be in agreement at the very least that there should be a line. I would reason that the line probably lies in different places for different people.

I can live with that.

“Is it immoral to enjoy violence in entertainment?”
Maybe. It would depend upon the violence, the person watching, the purpose behind it, etc…

Thank you.

Z
 
Jeanette L:
The point that most of us are trying to make here is that violence has a tendency over time to desensitize us to cruelty. You can argue all you want that one type of violence is acceptable even if another is not, but one type will *inevitably lead to the craving * to go to the next level. Lust of any nature works in that fashion, it promotes cravings. And the craving for violence is just that, a type of lust. You can argue until you’re blue in the face, it doesn’t change the nature of that beast.
I’m probably pushing my luck here given that there seems to already be a consensus, but…

I would have to disagree that one type of violence will lead to the craving to go to the next level.
Enjoyment of one type of violence could lead to the craving to go to the next level. But it also may not.
Does your appetite, and the satisfaction of it through eating inevitably lead you to gluttony?
Does the enjoyment of alcohol inevitably lead to alcoholism?
Does sleep inevitably lead to sloth?

No matter how many car crashes I see on TV, the impact, shock, and horror of the real thing is always there when I am witness to the event.
No matter the fights I have seen on TV, the disgust at the inhumanity remains when I see an actual fight in public.
I used to have a friend that watched movies, would watch the most horrid dimemberments, tortures, etc. off movies rented from Blockbuster…he would faint at the sight of real blood.
I have watched many people falling from buildings on various movies and TV shows. But nothing compared to the sick, queesy feeling as I watched people jump from the trade towers on live TV.

Perhaps it is just a very well placed sense of what is and is not real. But I discern no desensitization here.

Z
 
No matter how many car crashes I see on TV, the impact, shock, and horror of the real thing is always there when I am witness to the event.
No matter the fights I have seen on TV, the disgust at the inhumanity remains when I see an actual fight in public.
Me as well. The original question was “is it immoral to enjoy violence…” I’m going to sound Clintonesque here because it depends on what is meant by enjoy. I enjoy drama and the essence of drama is conflict, which often includes the physical. It really depends if that conflict is resolved morally (for instance, few people would poo-poo Gary Cooper defending the townspeople who have all abandoned him in High Noon) or immorally (can’t think of an example–probably a good thing. 🙂 ) In these cases I am not enjoying the violence in and of itself, only in as far as it contributes to good drama and an edifying resolution.

Scott
 
Also, I read with interest the part on WWF. Now I’m not sure enough of myself to pontifically declare that anyone watching it is not a Christian (which makes me wonder if non-Catholics dislike the papacy because they are secretly competing for his job. 😉 ), but while there is much to object to in pro-wrestling (scantily-clad women, steriods, etc.) the theatrical violence is not among them. It is not because it is essentially dramatizes Proverbs 16:18–Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.. Virtually every story in wrestling is the same: we have the arrogant bad guy inflicting a reign of terror on all comers, struting in the ring, talking trash about his greatness, etc. The audience boos this Goliath appropriately, hoping for a David to come along and administer some comeuppance. The arrogant bad guy is defeated and a good, morally-ordered universe is reaffirmed. Of course the new victor usually becomes arrogant and the pattern repeats, reminding us that even our heros are still sinners.
 
Scott Waddell:
Me as well. The original question was “is it immoral to enjoy violence…” I’m going to sound Clintonesque here because it depends on what is meant by enjoy. I enjoy drama and the essence of drama is conflict, which often includes the physical. It really depends if that conflict is resolved morally (for instance, few people would poo-poo Gary Cooper defending the townspeople who have all abandoned him in High Noon) or immorally (can’t think of an example–probably a good thing. 🙂 ) In these cases I am not enjoying the violence in and of itself, only in as far as it contributes to good drama and an edifying resolution.

Scott
And this is the point I have been trying to make, that gratuitous violence, which is violence shown for it’s own sake, is not virtuous. If there is not a moral objective, **it can be ** harmful.

For instance, I could watch Schindler’s List, which is very disturbing because of the violence it portrays. But the point of portraying that violence is to show how evil that violence actually is, and how harmful violence can be to humanity when our hearts are not on guard against it. It is specifically intended to keep the audience from forgetting the atrocities that we as humans are capable of committing against each other. (although this example is still not one of enjoyment)

Or, on the flip side, I could watch SAW, or Nightmare on Elmstreet,…which portray violence for it’s own sake, just to gross out the audience, or make them laugh, whatever a particular person’s response may be to that kind of graphic gore, but we can be sure that the intent of the movie is not particularly moral in nature, although I have heard some *very lame * arguments that only the fornicators get murdered, I’m sorry, morality is not the goal of the movie. The goal is to glorify the violence and gore itself.

So it does come down to intent. I can watch CSI (most of the time) because the intent is to show what science and good detective work can accomplish in crime solving, which is on the side of bringing about social justice, and the reality of that type of work is that it is most often a job not for the squeamish but for the dedicated.

I think the foolproof test would be, to put a very holy, pure soul in front of a movie screen and see their reaction to some of the violence we are discussing, even some of the violence we think more innocent. If it grieves them deeply, you can be sure it is something to be wary of. The fact that we who continually expose ourselves to it without effect just shows the deadening it has already done to our souls, even if we think it is only make believe.
 
Jeanette L:
I think the foolproof test would be, to put a very holy, pure soul in front of a movie screen and see their reaction to some of the violence we are discussing, even some of the violence we think more innocent. If it grieves them deeply, you can be sure it is something to be wary of. The fact that we who continually expose ourselves to it without effect just shows the deadening it has already done to our souls, even if we think it is only make believe.
I suppose that that could be one way to tell.
But have my doubts as to the availability of a ‘very holy, pure soul’

I would also have ethical doubts about this test.
If the violence proves OK, great. But if the violence proves otherwise, you have effectively removed the ‘pure’ in this ‘very holy, pure individual.’

Surely there must be some other criteria with which this can be judged.

Might I suggest a judgement based upon the individuals own responses? If there is a deadening effect, then we could readily interpret the exposure to be ‘bad’ If no deadening effect, ‘not bad’.
Of course, we would then need a means of measuring this deadening effect that is spoken of…

Z
 
o.k., let’s make up 2 cases.

First person says, “My faith in
God is such that I no longer desire to watch horror movies.”

The other one says, “My faith in God is now so strong that I
desire to watch more horror movies.”

Which one sounds like they are on the right track?

Which track are you on?
 
40.png
cheeto1:
Which one sounds like they are on the right track?

Which track are you on?
How about this:
‘My faith in God is such that I know him, Love him, and wish to please him. I wish to understand more so that I may serve him better.’

Wouldn’t it be nice to be able to actually answer the question in the subject line with something other then ‘maybe’ and be right?

Z
 
I think this all depends on the human being. Films that glorfy violence are immoral, however a film that happens to have violence in it due to the circumstances in the story line Cannot be said to glorify violence or be immoral. Most films, even childrens animations have violence in them, there is violence all around us.The entertainment industry know that people lust for violent films, so they make them, But thay allso make films in Which violence is neccerary to the the plot, Like a super hero saving a women from a group of rapist using force( which is neccerary violence and is understandable to the plot). Is there somthing wrong with watching a film just because it has violence in it? or is it wrong to gloryfy and desire violence in your “heart”
If you lust for violence in the heart and desire to cause harm to people in “real life” because of watching a film, then i agree that you shouldnt watch a films with Violence.

If i was a film maker, i might make a film about the reality of the Cruel streets of london, which would natural include violence. When you watch it, your watching it for the “overall film” “the story”, Not for the violence, You relate to the violence because it happens in real life. If you cheer the violence and take elements of it in to your reality then you have a sugestive mind which could lead to your demise. You might see the demise of the bad guy in an action movie and cheer, but you would not do that in “real life” because its not in your heart to cheer the demise of people.

I think it depends on the film and what it is promoting. If its promoting an intresting story line that has bloody elements that are neccerary to the film, i see nothing wrong with it unless your seceptable to commiting sin as a result of wacthing it. If its a film
that is a promotion tool for violence and works soley on your lust for violence, then you shouldnt watch it. If you watched the rise and fall of a boxer, like ali, theres more to the film then just boxing, thier are other elements that express the life of the boxer, on the other hand, i would not watch a live boxing match because i dont enjoy watching two people boxing each other to a pulp.

There is also the factor of whats real and what isnt. If your see sombodys head explode in a film for what ever reason :eek: , i dont see how you could be commiting a sin by wacthing it unless your wacthing it specifically to satisfy a lust for violence and to act it out in reality. If you see sombodys head explode in real life your gonna be in a state of shock, possibly for the rest of your life. But when one watches a film that is made up of a collections of actions and conceqences that lead up to a man head exploding, you are not affected in the same way, you might cringe, but thats all, unless you have a problem with seeing the diffence between reality and fiction.

Some people have suggestive minds like children that cannot tell the difference between reality and fantasy. If i pretend to hurt you, is that the same as me wanting are “lusting” to hurt you? i dont Think so. Thats just my opinion however.

If you feel that films with violence in them affect your relationship with Christ, then it wouldnt hurt to go with out it. I am just stressing that, “violence” when used in a film to portray and element of reality, isnt in my opinion immmoral, nither is it immoral to watch. Some times in very extreme circumstances violence is nesserary, The film called “the ten commandments” Dipicts God using “Violence”.

When isreal are freed from slavery, it is done by violent plagues and death. When isreal leave egipt and walk through the sea that was parted by God, the soldiers that came after them are drowned. When i saw this i cheered for isreal freedom and gave glory to God! but this is not the same as gloryfiying the soldiers death’s or the Violence that was used, i wasnt glad that they where dead but i was glad that they wasnt a fret, i was glad that evil had been defeated. “The violence in the film was necceray to the plan” Violence is a part of are reality and therefore is depicted in films, Films like eunich. But if you desire Violence in your heart and only watch FIlms for that sake then it is dangerous for your faith.

Computor games are different. I dont play games that would suggest that i make a moral choice to kill because this insights lust for violence. Theres no real story lines to games, you just go on missions killing people feeding your lust for violence. Violent computor games make violence more exciting rather then movies though some films have the same affect. It depends on you as a person, but i most definetly recormend you stay away from computor games like grand theft auto and role playing games where the main objective is to kill, i do feel personaly that these games are dangerous and contradictive to my faith since these games are manifested simply to engage your lust for “violence and death” 😉 👍 .
 
Depends on how, why, and what is done. Some of the stuff is just plain gross, and why anyone would enjoy watching it is questionable at best.

Some of it is just a reflection of the real world, and can be informative and educational and be very positive.

It also depends on how it is done and presented. Some of the best directors can imply violence while showing very little actual blood and guts (eg Alfred Hitchcock).

However if you are addicted to the splatter movies or have some sick obsession with watching blood and guts horror movies, then you may want to seek counseling.

I like the movies where the bad guys get splattered in the end (or thorughout). Keifer Sutherland in “24” is one of my favorite characters, he always makes the bad guys suffer (or kills them execution style)… it’s illegal, but he gets away with it,
 
However if you are addicted to the splatter movies or have some sick obsession with watching blood and guts horror movies, then you may want to seek counseling.
Two thoughts on this…

I am uncertain I have ever seen anyone ‘addicted’ to any type of movie genre.
and…
I am uncertain I would find anything sick about just enjoying a good scare.

While it is nice to have a director that can scare the audience with mere implications of violence, it is refreshing once in a while to have a director dispense with implication and throw a blunt story at us.

:twocents:

Z
 
I was watching 2 children play at violence the other day.
One joyfully stabbed a toy and told me gleefully “he’s
dead!” And then what happened? I asked “did he go to
heaven?” “No!” was the answer, “He was just a pagan,
pagans don’t go to heaven, my daddy said so”. So I
asked if the man who stabbed him was a Christian. I was told that yes he was.

My question to the “grown ups” is this: Is it God’s work
to kill pagans or to convert them? Again I say that
those who enjoy violence in entertainment are like
children playing at violence. No harm done, o.k. But
how long do we remain children? Eventually we run out
of time to do the work that God has set before us.
Then what? Who do you think is the most happy about
violence: God or the devil?
 
40.png
Alterum:
Two examples that immediately come to mind are computer gamers that purposefully go over-the-top in terms of violence, and those zombie horror films where the only real appeal is seeing zombies get blown apart. Is there anything wrong with enjoying this sort of entertainment (not disproportionately so, but occasionally), and if so, what, specifically?

Thanks in advance 🙂

I think it is, but I’m not sure, or even sure why :o

 
40.png
Alterum:
Two examples that immediately come to mind are computer gamers that purposefully go over-the-top in terms of violence, )
I have noticed that some teenagers and pre-teenagers are putting a lot of time into playing computer games like this, and also non-violent type of computer games. For some it seems like it might be an addiction of some sort. Does anyone think that it would be wrong for teenagers or pre-teenagers to put too much time into this type of activity. the way that I think about it is that we are given a certain amount of time here on earth and this time should be used for activities which are of some value either to ourselves or to others. Unfortunately, I don’t see any value to these violent or action type computer games, beyond sheer entertainment, and I see a problem in it becoming an addiction, in the sense that it could be taking time from more valuable activities. It would be difficult to set a hard and fast rule for a time limit or to say specifically what is wrong about computer games, but still, it does seem like there would be something wrong when it becomes an addiction, and eats away a lot of time and attention.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top