Playing “the Game” made me experience apathetic and did non impact my behaviour or actions. I strongly disagree with anyone who thinks that any of a person’s personal actions. in respects to the sharing of information and personal minutess.
should be monitored and used as grounds against them in any sort of state of affairs. “The Game” has farther reinforced my sentiments on the monitoring of personal things.While some pupils allowed “the Game” to alter the manner they acted. I chose to go on my normal modus operandis and hoped that they either wouldn’t break the regulations or that the thinkpol wouldn’t catch me. The chance that any of the three original thinkpol were about to see me interrupt a regulation and so maintain record of it so they could describe it to Mrs.
Hamilton was reasonably low. The lone regulations that changed my behaviour were regulations 6 and 5. as these were regulations that could non merely be avoided.I have ever had a general disfavor of people supervising my actions and this game has non helped to rock my sentiment of monitoring. Ingsoc is mostly based around the monitoring of people and would non win without monitoring and commanding through things liketelescreens. newspeak. and doublethink. In the book 1984.
even thoughtcrime was punishable. They monitored even your facial looks to do certain you weren’t perpetrating facecrime. In the book. Miniluv is the name of the ministry responsible for supervising people.
The chief ground I dislike the thought of supervising people’s actions is because the people that monitor your actions are. in fact. no different from the people being monitored. Worlds are.
in their very nature. able to be swayed by something like a payoff or merely a personal feeling. The fact that the thinkpol were our equals who had already formed sentiments about us. whether good or bad. besides changed the manner they monitored us. even if they weren’t consciously cognizant of it.
The same rules will use in existent life outside of a game.The “Game” had really small consequence on my behaviour. in portion because the regulations were simple and mindless and besides because the effects were minimum. While it failed to do me alter my behaviour it did do me cognizant of the unfair act of supervising people’s actions. I felt shorted because my penalty was in the custodies of person who had already formed personal sentiments about me and was merely chosen by random instead than a qualifying factor.