/jp/ - Otaku Culture

What a lame Azuma.

OP here.

I'm stuck on my essay, have about 2.5 out of 4 pages written. Could use some input.

>>4881390
When we undertake to create symmetry in an urban environment, we want buildings to be as alike as possible while allowing for adaptation to context. If we understand geometric depth we can build in such a way that poor and expensive buildings have the same basic design in their first levels of geometry, but expensive buildings have many more scales of geometry nested within that basic design. It is not necessary for an entire city to be made of the same materials as materials are one of the last visible scales of geometry, and so we can have a city of mud bricks and marble buildings that nevertheless share 95% of their geometry and beautifully complement each other, while both poor and rich citizens have a home adapted to their situation.

>>4881264
What and erotic Fuuka

>>4881428
does not pertain to topic at all. Interesting info though.

Azuma’s work explores “otaku” production and consumption, and what they suggest about man’s search for meaning. He argues that today’s “otaku” no longer crave narratives and wider significance, but are instead gratified by reading for character “elements”—things like cute cat ears, maid uniforms and loose socks.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/book-reviews/view/hiroki-azuma-the-philosopher-of-otaku-speaks

Sounds interesting.

I'd say he's mostly right. Because I can find nothing profound or redeeming about otaku culture from the consumer standpoint. We just mindlessly consume things pretty much.

So are you arguing from the production side of things? At least some anime and eroge can have well-written stories and may be considered works of art.

>>4881678
Well I certainly do not agree with him. He is just going for a witch hunt after people who do not fit into the "normal" categories of society, judging it to be inferior to "normal" society. That's just a lot of bullshit.

Otaku search themselves just like everyone else, but unlike everyone else they do not give in the society demands, instead choosing to be whoever they want and do whatever they wish, without considering what's accountable or normal. They still identify themselves with society's demands, which is why they feel the need to hide and fear the opinion of others.

http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm5033082
piston azuma

"Let's really look at Otaku culture. Socially disfunctional individuals with declining interpersonal skills, minimal economic viability, disaffection with reality and real relationships and rabid consumerism of intellectually and culturally empty commercial products.

So where is this great wealth of creativity? Do most Otaku contribute to the knowledge and development of humanity? Do they contribute to the betterment of others. Do they provide a foundation for Japan's economic future? Could they survive once Mom or Dad cut off the funding? And if so, will that survival be adequate to even sustain Otaku culture?

I argue that it is one more piece of evidence of the dumbing down of humanity into mindless consumers hell bent on collecting stuff to gratify needs that have been fed to them by marketers. While they may demonstrate some creativity within their world, what good does it do society and what benefift to the welfare of Japan beyond the modest contributions to niche industries?

If Otaku want to be bastions of creativity, they should forget maid cafes and Shade created virtual cuties and turn their attention to inventing new products for Japan's future, solving global problems or working to be contributors to the development of long term real culture instead of shallow commercial culture and social isolation."

I don't know, OP. His side makes a pretty strong case. And the majority of /jp/ - Otaku Culture can probably attest to it.

>Let's really look at Otaku culture. Socially disfunctional individuals with declining interpersonal skills, minimal economic viability, disaffection with reality and real relationships and rabid consumerism of intellectually and culturally empty commercial products.

>So where is this great wealth of creativity? Do most Otaku contribute to the knowledge and development of humanity? Do they contribute to the betterment of others. Do they provide a foundation for Japan's economic future? Could they survive once Mom or Dad cut off the funding? And if so, will that survival be adequate to even sustain Otaku culture?

>I argue that it is one more piece of evidence of the dumbing down of humanity into mindless consumers hell bent on collecting stuff to gratify needs that have been fed to them by marketers. While they may demonstrate some creativity within their world, what good does it do society and what benefift to the welfare of Japan beyond the modest contributions to niche industries?

>If Otaku want to be bastions of creativity, they should forget maid cafes and Shade created virtual cuties and turn their attention to inventing new products for Japan's future, solving global problems or working to be contributors to the development of long term real culture instead of shallow commercial culture and social isolation."

I don't know, OP. His side makes a pretty strong case. And the majority of /jp/ - Otaku Culture can probably attest to it.

>>4881746

>going for a witch hunt after people who do not fit into the "normal" categories of society, judging it to be inferior to "normal" society.

Isn't that just what the typical 'normal person' does anyway? It's not that big of a deal.

It's distasteful but I think he's completely on the money. On a side note I know for a fact the Japanese culture class at UF uses this book, though I'm not enrolled in it. Not sure if that has anything to do with anything, though.

>>4881882
Be one of the herd, do not deviate, work your self to death for the elites, castrate yourself with overwork, stress and booze. Being a typical Japanese sounds so good.

>>4881927

>typical human being

Correction.

>>4881927
Probably a troll but still, being different or individual does not\ mean isolating oneself and mindlessly consuming a shallow subculture.

OP here. Sorry, was proofreading my essay, and trying fruitlessly to lengthen it.

I'm not trying to argue whether otaku are productive or not. Its whether they lack a grand narrative and whether their behavior is animalistic.

I argued along the lines of that otaku obsession is merely negatively viewed because the content that is not appreciated by others. When I watched Japanorama and saw the lines for that model-fest, it looked no different from a black friday sale. The only difference is whats sold. I expanded on this quite a bit more.

I'm trying to formulate another argument, still to no avail.

>>4881942
I don't think anyone would argue that black friday (and indeed the modern Christmas) shows anything but a lack of a grand narrative. That in itself seems faulty, though perhaps it's merely a lack of context causing the discrepancy.

Comparing it to society in general won't make the comparison work. It has to be productive, cultured society if you really want to drive the point home, and christmas shopping won't fulfill that.

How does he feel about NicoDou and user-generated content like doujin?

>>4881960

Probably hates those, too.

Otaku culture involves several sophisticated concepts that are far from shallow. For example, I don't think the average indoctrinated prole is really going to be interested in exploring the stranger facets of his sexuality. Just because a work represents everything that's repulsive to the average person's ethics doesn't mean it also lacks aesthetic appeal.

What exactly is a "grand narrative"? Or "animalistic" behaviour? These things have no grounded referents... the terms are meaningless.

Creativity found in anime and manga is different from the creativity required to solve problems... for one thing, it's fun.

>>4881973
There's a difference between those who explore their sexuality and those who let their sexuality control them. I consider myself one of the latter, but I would not think of myself as cultured or productive because of it.

>>4881976
That's a good point, and it makes me wonder if he defines them any better in the book. I would think that it refers to culture, but in exactly what capacity I'm not sure.

>>4881942
I argue it's absolutely meaningless whether they're proactive in a way that society recognize, the point is that they're doing whatever they want and some people are being butthurt about it because they're jealous.

>>4881960
OP here.
Thinking about using doujin as an example of how otaku do generate productivity, creativity, thus a culture.

Can anyone help me expand on this?

>>4881985
How are you supposed to refute something you don't even know the meaning of? It probably has no meaning either.

>>4881986

You and I, we think the same.

This is the first time I've seen someone other than myself express that in that way. I'm glad I'm not the only one.

...I can't stand normal folk, because they won't leave folk like us alone.

>>4881986
If we can't even agree on what a productive member of society is there's no point in trying to further this discussion, and I don't think any amount of talking will change anyone's mind on that, so perhaps we should leave such discussion out of this?

>>4881988
It's going to be a tough sell when many doujin works feature little more than the same maid clothes and cat ears that are wholesale consumed in the original works. Perhaps the large body of doujin music? I don't think anyone would debate the artistic value therein.

So far all of the qoutes here are correct, too bad none of us really fall that deep, well most of us are still pretty normal for real otaku standards. Book sounds interesting. I really wish there was more manga like Yotsuba where the art is so bland and boring yet emotions and characters come out so nicely.

I wish K-on and all that shit would just die off...

>>4881998
OP here.
You're right, that would be a much better way to approach it. However, I know little about doujin music. How can I make an argument about something I don't know???

>>4881988
NicoDou, Vocaloid, Touhou. Good places to start.

Also, http://d.hatena.ne.jp/metagold/

The focus on otaku is probably due to their stigmatization in Japanese society. But being unable to contribute to society isn't a bad thing. It's too simple to say some things are good and others are bad - good in regards to what, to whom exactly? Society maybe loses a member of its valuable workforce, and the otaku might have a bleak future, and their parents are burdened with them if they refuse to leave home. But on the whole it doesn't matter whether society rises or declines, whether someone dies at 40 or 100, or that parents are burdened.

>>4881976
As in an existential narrative. And he probably means animalistic in the sense that otaku are seen to lack a concern for the problems that are unique to humanity, mostly philosophical in nature. Rather than be concerned with the meaning of life or self-actualization, otaku derive all of their pleasure from obsessing over aesthetic peculiarities like Reimu's armpits.

>>4882010
There's not an awful lot to know. Touhou music (easiest example), which is generally new arrangements of the original soundtrack produced by ZUN, features extensions beyond what was originally created, to the point where entire bands are formed that perform this kind of thing. There is a large community and many circles who make this music, showing creativity within a niche subculture.

Still, I find myself agreeing with Azuma the more I think about it. It really is consumerism at its finest. I wish you luck.

>>4881988
Making doujins will not benefit japan in any way. It's just otaku selling merchandise to other otaku. Sure it's being creative and all but you're not helping the general population, you're helping the otaku. Sure they're being creative and making a point and they might even turn some normal people into otakus, but it's not productive, nothing of material worth can be gained from it.

>>4882021

Some might say that this simply means otaku don't let themselves be burdened by ...stuff. I lack the intelligence to express my thought.

I'm trying to say that some could see that as a wise way to live life.

>>4882014
Yeah... and how is that contributing to japan? It only makes foreign "otakus" buy stuff. And it's so niche that you can't even see it as profit.

>>4882021
(not the person you were replying to but)

So existential narrative as in a development of culture? I just want to make sure I have a clear grasp on what's being discussed.

>>4882021
Did you know that most people don't care about those things, either? Why not widen this to all humanity? Would it be too ridiculous then? Too obvious the standards philosophers and artists apply to the human race really only fit that small introspective slice they belong to? Too obvious that all these huge essays and books are only to justify their own existence, bring about a society they find tolerable, change the world to be more deep and intellectual like them?

>>4882018
I don't think the nihilistic perspective will bring us to any sort of greater understanding, and indeed this pessimistic outlook need not be taken further than you have, so we may as well develop the alternate perspective of the practical usefulness of an individual to general society.

>>4882039

That is so obvious I can't believe this post was the first I've read or heard of this idea.

>>4882018
Well pretty much this, average people contribute to society as much as an otaku does, sure you're a salary man and you do some shit at some company and what not, but you're not affecting anyone with that, and you're easily replaceable. Politicians, Inventors the really educated or influential people shape society not the average joe.

Thats why democracy was invented, it makes you feel like you make a difference. In really you're just a single individual among almost 7 billion others. You can't do shit if you're not in politics or some similar job.

>>4882043
Why should you accept that society needs to be helped, or contributed to? Maybe if it provides the individual with what they want, but what if they have everything they want?

Can you actually logically explain why it's so important? How is it any different from religious arguments that require you to accept the existence of god first? If you won't reason the basis of your argument, how can it have substance?

>>4882054

Yes

YES

PREACH IT BROTHER

>>4882054
There is no need to, for the sake of discussion. If you don't feel the general advancement of society is important, no amount of reasoning or lack thereof will change anyone's conclusion on the subject. It is a matter of opinion, I suppose.

>>4882054
Furthermore the original point of the thread was to discuss the OP's point, relating to his paper, which I believe requires him to adopt a perspective of societal advancement.

>>4882065
Then why not obviously say so? It's a perfect refutation, isn't it, since it can't be argued? The wellbeing of society, productivity, and all that are only important good things from the perspective of certain people. In the eyes of others they don't matter at all - the future doesn't matter, their jobs don't matter, only intangible things with no direct monetary or speculative worth. Put this way, things become clear. Azuma, and those who agree with him, believe that a person's worth is defined by their overall contribution to society. He cannot prove this. It is his opinion, his view, based on his ethics and morality. You literally cannot change his mind.

>>4882039
If most people didn't care about those things, they would be very wise. Most people are concerned with those questions, just in a much more crude way than the academic philosopher. Ask the average person whether they believe in supernatural forces that govern their lives or 'right and wrong', and rather than staying silent, they will spout off their own brand ill-reasoned bullshit given to them by some authority figure.

>>4882054
>actually logically explain
Yes, if there wasn't a such a thing in the past you'd still live in caves, too bad the societies of today are automated by law and they're so populous that your contribution is irrelevant and unnoticeable. But it sure would become evident if everyone went the otaku way. As it is now the moral, lawful and ethical standards are in so you pay taxes and the government does the "advancement".

So to answer is "to better our selves and our standards of living" because if people didn't do that for the last 300 years we'd be still in the middle ages being spoon feed information by the church.

Otaku culture is just hedonism. But what's wrong with that? Who says people have to contribute to society? Was society created to control people? etc. etc.

I'm gonna go fap to some doujins now.

>>4882080
Ok? Judging someone by their contributions (i.e. their actions) is the only logical way of judging someone I can see. If you think judging in and of itself is a useless or fruitless exercise, then again, there is no point to this discussion at all, which I believe is what you're arguing to try and close the thread. But there's still something to be explored here, I think, namely what the OP is trying to argue
>>4881988
>>4882010

>>4882084
You find this undesirable. Others, though, are probably indifferent. Why do you try to make it seem like it absolutely is?

>>4882088
Yes, judgment is as futile as everything else. My problem is speaking for the whole of society with this limited-perspective judgment, as though you could possibly know their minds...

Lots of people here agree with Azuma, and I want to ask them why. You can argue with him in his little theoretical universe for the rest of time, if you want.

OP here. For those who are curious, here is the essay prompt.
In “Translator’s Introduction” of Otaku: Japan’s Database Animals, Jonathan Abel and
Shion Kono argue that “[w]hat Azuma does first and foremost is provide a critique of
otaku culture that calls their behavior animalized; theirs is a culture lacking not only a
grand narrative but also the power to speak or articulate meaning beyond surfaces” (p.
xxviii). Write a critical paper either supporting or refuting their summary of Azuma’s
main argument above.

>>4882094

I'd say that people who agree with Azumi and his ilk are just being affected by the hive-mind that is "society".

I don't understand that way of thinking either, and I don't suppose I ever will understand the mind of a normalfag.

>>4882106

Fucking typo. Go away i, you are taking a's place.

>>4881882 isn't Azuma's view. It's just a comment on the article.

>>4882106
>>4882094
So you guys, well not you everyone in the world, well the developed one at least, are basically dependent on society to provide your with money, health care, education, housing, food and pretty much everything else. And you feel no need at all to give it something back?

>>4882128

Personally, no. I didn't ask to be born, but if I am here I might as well take advantage of everything I can.

I pursue pleasure and nothing else. I only have this one lifetime, after all.

This attitude may be childish, but I stand firm in my beliefs.

>>4882132

Also, the ill treatment I have received at the hands of 'society' has left me feeling rather bitter towards it.

>>4882128
It depends where you draw the line. Are some things unacceptable to give to society? Love, for instance, or kindness...

Or are some things too low, unworthy, void of meaning or value? Just like you can't sell happiness, what's valuable about art depends on the beholder. Maybe he's reminded of an old childhood friend, or his hometown. Maybe he sees himself in some of the characters, or feels the sense of an obstacle being overcome when a story is resolved.

What place do we have to judge people's contribution to the world, the universe, working only from the most incomplete information with the vaguest terms? They're vague because they're never exact, always grounded in abstract emotionally-charged reasoning, so you could argue forever if you wanted. Isn't it a waste of time? Why bother? Does it contribute anything in the end, even in the short-term?

>>4882132
While you might despise normalfags, and are not satisfied with being born. That attitude is species/self destructing and would lead to nothing from a biological standpoint, and you like most hedonist will have a change of heart later if you do live up to 40+ years. It's like you're implying that you care about no one in the world but yourself, and they can do whatever they want as long as you live a life of luxury. I'm sure you views would be quite different if you didn't grow up where you were and didn't have the luxury you have now provided by this "society", in short you're a spoiled brat. I can quite tell since my country was at war.

>>4882157

Every single time I give my views I get butthurt replies calling me a spoiled brat. Forgive me if I continue to not give a single fuck.

>>4882157
But from a biological standpoint, it doesn't matter who lives or dies. There's no real, important difference between living and dead matter. It's all matter, in the end, a tiny bit of the universe.

>>4882162

Furthermore, it doesn't matter that I was born with all this luxury as you put it. I was, and that's how it is.

My country wasn't at war, so of course I can't possibly know what that's like.

It's not my fucking fault.

Or maybe it is.

I simply do not care.

>>4882164

Hello, Anonymous. You and I seem to think alike.

The futility of the universe is liberating. Why not focus on your own happiness, what would make you happiest, and aim for that? It doesn't matter that it comes for nothing in the end, because for this small moment in time you are alive. So do what you want...

>>4882174

Careful, or people will get major butthurt/latent jealousy and start calling you a spoiled brat.

>>4882176
Well, I think if a lot of people think about things this way they might find what makes them feel the best is being compassionate for others, having good friends or the like. Or they might not!

There isn't one conclusion everyone can draw from living for themselves, because people feel good all for different reasons... all as valid (in their invalidity) as the next.

>>4882143
My look on you comment is this. Society is an ant colony. We all have to to something to survive, again I'll point out that you're spoiled by luxury. You live in a society that so advanced by technology that some people don't need to work or contribute at all. The primary sector of economy today employs like 5% of most developed countries workforce. We live in a world of luxury compared to 200~300 years ago where you had to grow your own food and you where thankful as hell when society as a whole gave you some little bit of charity. No health care and whatnot.

This contributions to society I referring to simple is charity to help the ones that CAN'T work not won't because they're hedonists, self sufficiency as in having a job and not letting others take care of you. Just by taking a job you've done a great contribution to society, you're off it's financial wing and it can now spend or give that money to the ones that need it.

>What place do we have to judge people's contribution to the world
Well we don't live in some fantasy world. People's contributions can be summed up quite nicely with simple statistics. I'm talking about the economic contributions. The average joe does not have the intellectual capacity to provide society with technology, ideas or innovation.

To be honest, I would judge people based on their actions, if they're self sufficient as in having enough money too do and buy what they want and giving just minute portions to charity and helping other people thats HUGE contribution to todays society if you ask me.

>>4882198

You're a brainwashed slave to the human hive mind.

>>4882164
No thats from an universal, materialistic point of view, the biological point is that LIFE needs to REPRODUCE on order to survive. Why survive? BECAUSE IT DOES THAT.

Don't mix biology with materialism.

It's my view that you can be happy, as happy as anyone else, with absolutely nothing, in the direst poverty, dying of a horrible disease, downtrodden and looked down on by everyone.

You just have to change your terms, what you need to be happy. So if you say, "I don't need anything to be happy" or "I'm happiest in my current state, whatever that may be" and really apply that to yourself, it doesn't matter where you are. This is possible, I've tried it myself...

It's rather self-defeating, but I think it's the most useful when you're in a defeated state. Depression comes on because of inability to fulfill some thing seen as necessary for happiness, so...

If this is true, then the progress of society is really meaningless.

>>4882209

This person described my feelings accurately.

I have absolutely nothing to contribute.

>>4882198
But you, too, are life. If you decide to die, well, that's what you do.

>>4882216

You can't reason with these people, so don't try.

It's like talking to a brick wall.

A wall that wants to ruin your life and make you miserable because 'it is for the good of society'.

People like this should be killed.

>>4882201
You're a spoiled hedonist brat that cant see basic survivalist logic. Hell even basic LOGIC. If life or death has no meaning why not kill yourself? Why are you afraid of getting cut? Because it would hurt? Why don't you just cut your self into pieces if it means nothing? What you don't like that feeling? But feelings are just chemical reactions in your brain, they mean nothing.

Your opinion would change in an instant if you where thrown into jail, hell your opinion would change the instant you were forced to live like the average human in poverty and suffering.

>>4882222

You speak to me of logic?

You are incapable of independant thought.

>Your opinion would change in an instant if you where thrown into jail, hell your opinion would change the instant you were forced to live like the average human in poverty and suffering.

Oh yeah? It's a pity I can't prove anything to you.

>>4882221
>A wall that wants to ruin your life and make you miserable because 'it is for the good of society'.
Were exactly did this come from? The hell...

>>4882230

You don't want 'useless' people to just live as 'spoiled brats', you want them to work and be productive.

Well, that would ruin my life and make me miserable. I would literally rather die. Again, it's a pity I can't prove anything. I've lived that. I'd do anything to avoid living it again.

>>4882222
Actually, you're right on the money! From a person's perspective, they wouldn't want to die because it would be unpleasant. But others really do want to die, or suffer, and anyone can in the right state.

But while one man might bemoan the loss of his wallet, the thief is happy. Whether it lasts forever is irrelevant: nothing does anyway, and in the here and now he survives. And when he becomes unable, he'll just have to survive another way.

Okay, you three are apparently at different ends of the spectrum when it comes to your attitudes toward life, and there's obviously no convincing either side. Stop arguing about it.

I liked when this discussion was more about otaku and whether their culture had value or not. And the OP just wanted some help with his paper, which everyone doesn't even seem to care about.

>>4882233
Well it tells a lot about your "self" and personality when you say this.

And in what EXACT way would 8 hours of work run your life? I don't understand it, you can't endure 8 hours of work a day? How would that make you miserable? I don't understand it...

>>4882244
Trolling : They don't want to contribute to society they want to do what they like and thats argue with me "normalfag"

>>4882246
In what way does poverty ruin your life, or jail? Would I be right in saying, "because you can no longer live how you want to"?

An otaku working 8 hours a day can't live how he wants anymore.

>>4882246
not one of us

>>4882246

Exactly, you just don't understand. It seems that nobody can. No, I cannot endure eight hours of work a day.

I don't think it's at all possible to adequately express why to a person like you, or even to anyone.

>>4882264

Well, except maybe that guy: >>4882256 .

I think that anyone who does not contribute to the good of society should not be allowed to be a part of that society. Except in retirement, obviously. Too much welfare state-ism has bred so much laziness.

OP loves how this discussion deviated so much. Sadly, OP still needs help, because I am unable to write a decent paragraph about doujin music. Help?

>>4882276

"Spoiled hedonist brat" here.

I agree with this. Maybe if I fucked off and disappeared people wouldn't be so butthurt that I like to take it easy.

As it is now, they'd just get angry that I was homeless or whatever, so don't tell me "But you CAN just leave it all behind".

>>4882256
Comparing poverty and jail, to making money for yourself and buying and owning whatever you want...

Well then good, you do your thing, I'll do mine, I'm not happy with the knowledge that my TAXes go to your supporting your life but I can deal with it since it's only a very minute fraction anyways, and supporting your life costs like nothing in comparison to the other things the government does with money anyways. Just be happy normal fags have compassion and let the likes of you live your lifestyle in luxury.

TROLLING : See a fellow of your otaku "society" wanted help with his essay and you were so hedonistic and self indulgent that you didn't even want to help him.

Croatia confirmed for shitty troll.

>>4882276
Naa? Economically society would be better with machines, you know, not people... but I suppose the prospect is unthinkable, inhuman?

>>4882306

Um, if this were face to face, I'd have tried to kill you by now. Just thought I'd tell you that.

(I'd probably fail, but I want to express my hate somehow)

Croatia confirmed for shitty country.

>>4882310

BUT THEN WHO WOULD BE ENSLAVED?

WHO WOULD ME MADE MISERABLE?

WE CAN'T POSSIBLY DO THIS!

>>4882309
I only trolled when I wrote "Trolling". See me as stupid or brainwashed or whatever you want, but I'm staying behind my words this time.

>>4882311
Using your hate to fuel a constructive argument would be better.

>>4882320

I do not want to.

I probably couldn't anyway.

>>4882306
But the cost is 8 hours a day.

>>4882311
So you're some kind of inbred hick? You can't express your disagreement through the gentlemanly expression of words so you resort to violence?

If you're awake 16, that's almost half your waking life. Honestly, I'd rather be a welfare otaku, or at least be doing something I really love.

>>4882326

That's exactly it. Honestly.

>>4882310
>Economically society would be better with machines, you know, not people

I suppose machines are supposed to invent them selves right? It's not like you need scientists or anything.

Also people are just machines too. Pretty awesome ones at that, since you can fuel them with inexpensive food stuffs, and then can do very delicate work too. They're pretty good at a lot of things, and they basically self repair minor damage, they last much longer 40 years or more!

>>4882329

...I don't even know how to get angry.

>>4882330
But once they're made, hey.

Society is overrated. /thread

>>4882335
Once they're made everyone can live an otaku lifestyle if he want, but for now you NEED to labor in order to live the life you want. THERE is no way around it.

I have no idea how the pension systems in other countries work but they all depend of the young to support the old, and the more you worked the bigger pension you have, if you never worked you get the bear minimum to survive, and with that you won't be able to life the "life" you want for the rest of your 30 years.

Hell welfare gets lower and lower the older you are, will you guys kill yourselves when you can't maintain otaku neet lifestyle or go to work?

Anyway, my point throughout this discussion is that it's nearly impossible to disprove Azuma's argument without either redefining his terms or refusing to use them. You can beat around the bush pulling out meaningless statistics, or attack the very basis of his argument, that the overall social perspective matters to the individual.

>>4882350
Well, you're right, an otaku can't live on his welfare forever. And I have a job, too. If I was in their position I'd work part-time or something and save up as much as I could, living out the welfare as long as possible and then going to college and getting a job when it becomes untenable.

Lots of people do this, there's even a name for it I don't remember, and I bet many otaku do as well.

>>4882351
I agree with this.

>Did you know that most people don't care about those things, either? Why not widen this to all humanity? Would it be too ridiculous then? Too obvious the standards philosophers and artists apply to the human race really only fit that small introspective slice they belong to? Too obvious that all these huge essays and books are only to justify their own existence, bring about a society they find tolerable, change the world to be more deep and intellectual like them?
This is the best argument against his whole meaningful culture nonsense

He's not talking about economics, so it's all you need. Elaborate on that and you'll get highest marks for sure.

Don't worry about being selfish brats. Adam Smith would praise you for being hedonistic and selfish because in the end, pursuing self-interest results in contributing to the betterment of society as the whole. Your purchase of figs, magazines, CDs, doujins and all generates income for manufacture workers and their families, which is a good thing.

In my search of meaning, existence, raison d'être and shit, I manage it in two frontier which is creative (drawing for cripplefuck OELVN, proofreading for Amaterasu) and consumptive (browsing /jp/, getting shallow fixes like VNs and porns). Pretty half-hearted effort but satisfying so far.

>>4882368
get out ksdev

I dunno. I'd feel pretty fucking horrible about using my parents hard earned money on selfish things. Sure, I'll buy things that are useful or things that I need with their money, but for things that attribute to my artistic, aesthetic and sexual cravings; I would much, much rather spend my own hard earned money.

Simply put, I'd never take advantage of another person's generosity and shame on any of you that have. Spoiled brats.

>>4882387
>Correction: Spoiled parasites.

I have long believed that Adam Smith is the most widely-quoted and least-read famous economist in history. To hear people go on about him, you would get the distinct impression that the core thesis of his Wealth of Nations was The Invisible Hand. So how many times does he mention it?

Once.

In the entire Wealth of Nations he mentions the invisible hand exactly once, in Book IV. Here is the quotation, just so you can actually say you’ve read it (unlike most folks who rattle on about Adam Smith as if they know something):

By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.

Smith originally introduced the idea of an invisible hand appearing to guide action in his early work, The Theory of Moral Sentiments. It may seem odd to talk about an “invisible hand” in a book on morality and ethical behavior. To hear die-hard laissez-faire free-marketeers tell it, the invisible hand is all about avoiding any and all restrictions on the exercise of self-interest. Ayn Rand, darling of the laissez-faire crowd, went so far as to elevate selfishness to the status of a virtue, and label altruism as immoral and destructive.

Smith knew better. He stopped well short of advocating deliberate altruistic behavior as necessary to the smooth function of the market, but he recognized that his “invisible hand” relied, to a considerable degree, on the basic morality and civility of the individual members of the society. In the opening of The Theory of Moral Sentiment he observes:

How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortunes of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it, except the pleasure of seeing it. Of this kind is pity or compassion, the emotion we feel for the misery of others, when we either see it, or are made to conceive it in a very lively manner. That we often derive sorrow from the sorrows of others, is a matter of fact too obvious to require any instances to prove it; for this sentiment, like all the other original passions of human nature, is by no means confined to the virtuous or the humane, though they perhaps may feel it with the most exquisite sensibility. The greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it.

In other words, the better angels of our nature, and the rules of social interaction those better angels dictate, form as important a part of any invisible hand’s benefit as does the desire for self-gain. They moderate, when we let them, what would otherwise be the more destructive effects of unbridled greed. The invisible hand depends on morality; it is not a substitute for it.

It seems to me that this is self-evident, and yet I repeatedly hear the argument advanced against any restriction on greed, that the invisible hand is a substitute for the better governors of human nature rather than a expression of them, that “The Market” will somehow make everything come out fine all by itself, as if it were some sort of magic happiness machine.

Just as in economic life, so also in political life people come together in the marketplaces of power with conflicting goals, and what emerges is often a compromise which advances the fortunes of all. But it does not happen by magic. When customs and civility moderate the self-interests of the participants, the machine works. When the participants pay no attention to their responsibility to the whole, the machine stops working.

In the 1600s and 1700s, every member of the Polish legislature had veto ability over all business of the body. So long as the individual members recognized their responsibility to the society as being paramount, Poland was able to manage with this bizarre arrangement. By the late 1700s, however, the traditional agreements on power sharing broke down and the Polish state became paralyzed. With paralysis came an inability to deal with its more energetic neighbors – Prussia, Austria, and Russia. The three surrounding powers took several chunks out of Poland and in 1795 partitioned it for the last time. It disappeared from the map of Europe until the end of World War I. Poland could not govern itself, so others did.

Today we are on the brink of something very similar. For generations the U.S. Senate has operated with a set of rules which, in theory, allow any member to hold up any appointment or block almost any piece of legislation. That apparent power has always been moderated by the informal sense of civility, mutual respect, and responsibility to the common good. In other words, there has always been an “invisible hand” guiding the behavior of senators, keeping them from destroying the system. Today all that is gone and the Senate hovers on the verge of total collapse and gridlock.

It seems clear to me that rules not only dictate behavior, in some ways they are dictated by behavior. I ran a publishing house for over twenty years. The company sick day policy was, “If you are sick, stay home.” Period. There was no endless calculation or worry over whether someone would have enough sick days, or wouldn’t use enough and so somehow screw themselves. People just stayed home – and were paid – while recovering from illness. It worked fine, but had a group of employees set out to test the system to destruction, push every rule to the limit of what was explicitly stated, I would have had to dramatically change the sick day policy.

Behavior would have dictated rules.

The Senate gets to reset most of its rules every session. If the senate cannot rediscover its own invisible hand, behavior will dictate rules. That or we run the risk of going the way of Poland.

For an excellent column on the parallels between Poland and the Senate by Nobel laureate Paul Krugman, follow this link.

>>4882351
These two go in concert. You can deconstruct Azuma's argument by applying >>4882361 to his work.

Shame to parents for allowing their future investment (children) turning into unproductive member of society, who consumes more import (Japan) goods rather than domestic goods and hence, domestic economy; and invest little of their time and skills into production at economics and creative frontier.

/jp/ culture venerates consumption but not production; hence drawfag, writefag and all are just circlejerking faggots, in contrast with cool boys who buy the most figs/play the most VNs/etc.

>>4882407
>>4882410
>>4882412
>>4882417
Cool wall of text bro. Tl;dr? Just because it's mentioned only once it's obselete? True Americans should buy American cars? One should be allowed to do everything if it's for 'greater good'?

Paul Krugman needs to be taken out to a near by wall and shot. I will provide the bullet gladly.

>>4882481
Advocating violence seems pretty animalistic, bro. Way to drive the point home.

>>4882494
I will provide a bullet fro you and use it myself.

>>4882498
Nah, man. Fro YO.

What is the grand nonnarrative?

I'm too lazy to finish reading the thread, but from what I've read thus far I would like to quickly present a few of my insights:

1-On the argument that contributing monetarily to society assists it, this is not necessarily true. People need food. People need water. People do not need service jobs (which is the majority of employment in developed countries). Unless you are farming, or developing some new technology, you are not helping society any more than an Otaku producing doujin.

2-On the argument that one is required to assist society with years of service, this is a ridiculous supposition. What is the point of a society? It is to provide laws/security for its citizens. If you do not particularly care about having police, then you have no need to support the institution (aside from the fact that it will hurt you if you don't).

3-On the argument that Otaku culture is hedonistic. This is a vast overstatement. Firstly, it overgeneralizes. Many people enjoy this stuff and contribute to society or contribute to this culture of theirs. By paying for this shit you are CONTRIBUTING MONETARILY TO SOCIETY. I believe this was one of the arguments against such a culture.

4-Society has no place judging your preferences. If you are not hurting anyone else it is not their job to judge what you do with your life. The fuck does it matter if you want to sit around and masturbate?

I feel absolutely disgusted reading some of the replies to this thread. When did people become machines?

It seems my outlook on life would also be seen by many as that of a spoiled brat living in the luxury of a developed country. To me life only has the meaning I give to it. If I do not see enjoyment in something I will not engage in it. I pursue only the things that interest me and everything else is not relevant to me.

If I wasn't interested in /jp/ related stuff I wouldn't be here. I wouldn't be in higher education right now if chemistry held no interest for me. If society believes me a spoiled brat then they may, it won't change how I live.

Polite sage for off-topic.

>>4887116
1- 200 years ago, most Americans live on farm. With the advantage of technology but inelastic food demand, production increase while revenue drops. Now only 2% of the labor force worked on farms to feed every Americans and export. To become farmer is useless since it's impossible to increase supply/lower the price; and superfood technology which can feed millions of hungry people can't be circulated due to fucking /patent/ issue. Who says service job is bad?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8610427.stm

2- Laws and security workforce gotta come from somewhere.

3- Agreed.

4- It's fucking wrong when people around you are dying. Lucky we all live in safe, civilized place with no apparent problem.

>When did people become machines?
Because we aren't able to find one absolute moral standard, we decided to trust nothing at all. Who cares about people dying at that side of the globe? Maybe that's just media hyping shit up. Fap fap fap.