| TornadoCreator said: And by that definition a pair of shoes, a DVD, or an ice cream would qualify as a toy so long as an adult buys them and intends to enjoy them in any capacity. Any student of language would know that a dictionary definition is woefully inadequate in any meaningful or in depth discussion, and quoting a dictionary is no more valid that saying "Bob said so". Dictionaries are written by commitee anyway, and we all know how useless that is, one only needs to look at world governments to see a prime example. It's argumentum ad populum at it's worst, as not only is it popular opinion of the commitee, with compromises destroying all accuracy and integrity of the text, but it's unaccountable at that, as no-one knows who's actually deciding on these definitions. Now, in the context of what we're discussing, the psychology of play, these words carry specific meaning, just like how "dirt" has no meaning in the field of forensic science, but means something to a layperson. It's incredible how little of these detailed meanings make it into the dictionary. In the discusson present, a toy is something that is played with in deconstructive or constructive play in which there is no structure, goal, or pre-determined purpose. You know that definition is correct, I know that definition is correct; and we both know it without the need of a "source" to quote too. You can argue semantics if you like, but if someone pointed to a table with a 6 inch plastic train, a travel set of monopoly, and a copy of 'Dark Souls' for PS3, on it and said, "Could you pass Daves toy", you'd pick up the train and you know you would, you'd not stop and ask "which one" would you? Any honest person would admit this much; this is because we all know, on a subconcious level what people mean when they say "toy". Honestly, I've always considered semantic arguments like this to be a sign of intellectual dishonesty, there's no way to disprove what either is saying but deep down we both know who's right, and the reluctance to admit that only makes people seem petty and childish, so I'd rather not push this argument any further because I don't see anyone having the humility to capitulate, (especially on the internet). One of the big annoyances for me here, especially when it comes to this misuse of the word "toy", is it's used derogatorily, in order to undermine and demine the medium of video games, and the people who play them. It's a god damn insult in other words, so why anyone would choose to perpetuate it seems senseless to me. This is why it's worth correcting, after all, I believe video games to be an artistic medium with just as much legitimacy as film, music, or any classic art. Would you also call a music CD a "toy"? No you wouldn't, and if you say you would, we both know you're lying just to be trite so don't bother. |
Again, I ask where your limited definition comes from. I didn't just quote the dictionary, I made an argument based on the etymology of the word, which you blew over. You keep using the phrase "psychology of play." Is there a paper published on this, "psychology of play" that clarifies these definitions? Anyway, the word "toy" is very often used to refer to objects one obtains which one derives trivial and easy enjoyment. Are you telling me that you've never heard somebody use the expression, "look at my new toy" in reference to things you wouldn't classify (according to your definition) as your toy. Since "toy" in this context is used to refute the notion that games are NOT trivial devices used for the sole purpose of having fun, it is perfectly fitting to use the word toy. Especially, considering the etymology of the word. For your last question, I've heard plenty of times people refer to their MP3 players, stereos, laptops, televesions, etc as "my new toy." For the purposes of this argument, the same holds for video-games. They are just as trivial as, say, an automated train or a BB gun.
