TED Conversations

Mathew Naismith

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

If it was allowed would an arena with gladiators fighting to the death prove popular in modern times?

I think it would be packed out myself which just show how bad our intellectual & moral selves have deteriorated back to sensationalism of the good old days of the Roman empire which has many similarities to the present empire we are living under today, what do you think?

Topics: sensationalism
+3
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Apr 10 2013: In a word yes.

    If we look at what is popular in current sports and media, the only thing we are missing is the actual fighting. Well, not even that. American football is fighting with pads on where the "big hits" are highlighted and repeated for the public. Mixed martial arts is stopped before death occurs but is nearly at this point. Boxing as well. "Wrestling", not the sport but the television show, is about blood and combat. Especially with the rise of MMA, we are nearly there.

    There would be those "opposed" to it in theory, but let's be honest with ourselves, the right marketer and the right publicity, this would be a great event. Money would roll rin, the bookies would make out big, and it would corner a portion of the market that is not "being met".

    So yes, absolutely it would be popular by those same folks that watch car racing for the accidents and WWE for the big hits.
    • thumb
      Apr 10 2013: G'day Everett

      Most of us seem to be saying the same thing, hypothetically if it was allowed the arenas would be packed & that is awfully sad or such a o called intelligent race f people to do. We looked at the Mayans some hundreds yrs later of being barbaric butchers, I'm just wondering what they will say about us in a few hundred yrs time as it won't have anything to do with being an intelligent civilised race of people that's for sure.

      Love
      Mathew

      PS Thank God for intelligent people such as us who denounce violence altogether!!
      • Apr 11 2013: I agree that the arenas would be packed and the "audience" would be a sellout consistently. Television/media would also make massive amounts from it.

        Where I break from your line of thinking is that intelligent people do not necessarily denounce violence. Mindless, gladiatorial violence as you discuss from the start of this thread, yes, that is abhorrent. The loss of life simply for sport, or any other reason is horrid.

        Violence, when it occurs in the protection of others, such as war, self-defense, etc. is a different category/level of it. And something that I would separate from this conversation. Sometimes, the threat of violence, through military force, is the thing that limits the violence itself.
        • thumb
          Apr 11 2013: G’day Everett

          In a sense you are breaking from my line of thinking, I agree that intelligent people can also intensify violence look at the splitting of the atom & the ensuing atom bomb for staters. Don’t get intelligence mixed up with deviousness, these devises people use intelligent people for their own devious ends that make them look clever but they aren’t the ones with the real brains behind their deviousness I believe!!

          Yes war & other related conflicts are needed at time like with the Coral Sea battle in WWII, if it wasn’t for so many Americans giving up their live in this one battle we Australians just might not be here now because it was that close however if we could rid ourselves of such violence the world of course would be a far better place.

          Love
          Mathew
      • thumb
        Apr 11 2013: With all due respect and love Mathew, I wish to remind you that several people, including me, have expressed the idea that if it was allowed the arenas would NOT be packed, so I do not agree that "Most of us seem to be saying the same thing". The fact that it is NOT allowed tells us something about how we, as thinking, feeling intelligent humans MAY be changing:>)
        • thumb
          Apr 11 2013: The thought that came to me in reading the question was that we are probably much better able to predict what people we actually know would do than people we do not know. In fact, people are, I think, much more likely to make negative assumptions about people they don't know.

          So what people predict tells us mostly about how they view others.

          I know this is not the question, but I think it is important for anyone to ask why he might view others more negatively than he tends to view those he knows well.
        • thumb
          Apr 11 2013: G'day Colleen

          I went through the yay's & nay's a couple of days ago & the yay's were ahead, do a count your self I don't think it's changed that much any it's never really worried me being a part of the minority.

          Your still missing the point Colleen, it's a hypothetical question because I know it wouldn't be allowed in most countries in the world but what if it was?

          Love
          Mathew
      • thumb
        Apr 11 2013: I agree Fritzie, with the idea that we may be better able to predict what people we actually know might do. The more information we have about a person, including ourselves, probably influences our own worldview.

        You think/feel "what people predict tells us mostly about how they view others"? Or could it be they are predicting based on their own worldview? Both?
        • thumb
          Apr 11 2013: If you mean do people who think others would enjoy watching brutal killing probably enjoy it themselves at some level and therefore assume others would, I doubt this is particularly true in this case.

          A couple of days ago I read an article by an evolutionary biologist who argued that humans have evolved with the protective trait of being suspicious of strangers, a trait not refined by evolution at this point to be more discerning. Of course people vary in how generally wary they are of strangers, just as we vary in our other traits.

          I think the default of suspicious and negative views of strangers may be connected to this evolutionary explanation.
      • thumb
        Apr 11 2013: Fritzie,
        No, I wasn't thinking of the idea that people who think others would enjoy something, would enjoy it themselves. Although, there is the idea of a "mob mentality", whereby energy builds within a group of people toward a certain goal. That is why I firmly believe that what we focus on expands. We can share energy that will lead to more beneficial outcomes when we focus on that.

        I was thinking more on the line of a worldview based on fear (suspicious). I agree that we vary regarding our feelings of being suspicious and it may be based on our experiences.
        • Apr 11 2013: could it be partially learned behaviors or an ingram that sticks with us from childhood when our parents told us not to talk to strangers?
        • Apr 12 2013: Hi everyone, I know this is a little off topic, but I live in KL, Malaysia. Apparently it is 'unsafe' here, if you asks the locals. The radio (I listen to a declared femiinst station) is always offering tidbits of advice like' ladies, always check your vehicle before entering' and 'never take you eyes off your kids, even for a moment'.
          I don't subscribe to the 'fear'. I have not educated my children about 'stranger danger', or indoctrinated them with any other sort of bias towards humanity, and unfortunately that means mostly men- just look at your local airline unaccompanied minor policy. I bet it states the child cannot be sat next to a male. his doesn't mean I don't want them to be mindful of there safety, or responsible for their belongings, it just means I don't put a human face to the reasons. Ie. don't leave your bike out the front because the garbage man might take it. There will be base, opportunistic people everywhere, and that will never change. Reporting EVERY SINGLE EVENT on mass media doesn't mean it is worse than it ever was.
      • thumb
        Apr 11 2013: Could be Nathan. I suppose it depends on how strong that advice was, and how it impacted us as individuals?
      • thumb
        Apr 11 2013: Hi Mathew,
        Regarding your comment for which there is no reply option.....

        "Mathew Naismith
        5 minutes ago: G'day Colleen
        I went through the yay's & nay's a couple of days ago & the yay's were ahead, do a count your self I don't think it's changed that much any it's never really worried me being a part of the minority.

        Your still missing the point Colleen, it's a hypothetical question because I know it wouldn't be allowed in most countries in the world but what if it was?
        Love
        Mathew"

        I'm not missing anything Mathew....I've read all the comments. I do not agree with your conclusion, and that's ok,......I agree to disagree:>)
        Love you too Mathew:>)
    • thumb

      May P

      • 0
      Apr 11 2013: Everett,
      Do you really think that those people who enjoy boxing or football would condone a fight to the death? I can stomach boxing no more than you seem to be able to, and its focus on blood and pain disturbs me, but it is not a fight to the death. The gladiators went into the arena with the understanding that one would die. A death in boxing is mourned, and an intentional killing is certainly punished. While I see the similarities, I am not convinced that gladiator fighting would be taken without an outcry.
      • Apr 12 2013: Yes and no.

        Folks who enjoy the sports for the sport aspect of it would probably not be immediately excited about watching a heightened violent event. However, a portion of the population absolutely would. Take MMA as an example. A portion of the population loves the MMA events for the violence. A portion of the population loves the violence in any sport. Take for example any injury or crash in a sport. They are replayed constantly to show the break or crash to the population.

        There would be an uproar at first in the heightened violence. There are those who would not support the events and protest against them. But, there are also those who would pay to attend. Just like there is a segment of our population that loves violent movies, many would love to attend violent sports. They would catch on, but probably not immediately go mainstream.

        There would be an outcry, but ultimately yes, it would take on in a certain portion of the population.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.