What is "fun"?

What is "fun"?

My impression is that fun is sexual display. This is why it's not considered possible to have fun alone.

To clarify, I mean oblivious sexual display. A "fun guy" is someone who is unconsciously driven to display his physical and neurological fitness through complex public activities, and does so because people keep approving of his display, even though this is too deeply rooted in the reptile brain for him to understand as being socially-driven display.

Is it possible for women to "have fun" in a way that doesn't involve either wearing either special clothes or less clothes? The question answers itself.

Attached: 1546104296303.jpg (361x534, 51K)

People like you should be terminated in the most humane way possible. You just don't operate correctly, no fault of your own really, you're just too far off "center" to function socially and it leads to behavior disorders that can turn violent

no it is possible to have fun alone you just have a small iq and even smaller imagination

Attached: 1517699553593.gif (90x140, 342K)

Fun is doing something you enjoy.

and yes, it is entirely possible for a woman to have fun in a way that doesn't involve sexual display.

Fun can be had in private, without anyone watching user. I have faith in you, you can grasp this concept rather easily.

People explain "fun" as if it were the same thing as pleasure, but every activity defined as fun takes place in social groups that gather in public places. All forms of fun are physical activities, if you count karaoke as a physical activity, which I do.

Clearly they don't understand what it is any more than I do, despite their large fund of knowledge of draw on. I suppose this is because conscious thought is incompatible with pleasure.

But not for me. On the contrary, I do everything consciously, and also enjoy everything I enjoy consciously, and I even enjoy consciousness itself. Whereas for you, thinking is like a toothache and a fit of depression combined. What a drag!

No, user. No. Fun is not enjoyment. This is like saying that the sea is the same thing as salt.

But vidya is fun, how is vidya sexual?

I dunno, the most fun I have is quietly painting since miniatures or reading a good manga
I'm good at having fun alone

But there IS salt in the sea, yes? Not only that, but I encourage you to google the definition of 'fun'

>Fun: enjoyment, amusement, or lighthearted pleasure.

So, you're objectively and literally wrong.

I suppose it's a simulation of competitive behaviour, most of the time, especially multiplayer games, but even games with only non-player characters in them. I don't really play games, so I'm not an expert.

For the most part, normies aren't gamers except if they physically meet up with a console, and those types would turn into a pillar of salt if they ever set eyes on Dwarf Fortress, the least sociable game there is.

What I'm arguing is that fun is social, and that there is a sliding scale of "normie fun."
On one end is something like surfing, and on the other is playing Dungeons and Dragons, if people still do that.

I would call that a satisfying or enjoyable activity rather than fun.
What I'm trying to do ITT is grapple with the normie concept of fun, which seems incredibly specific.

Dictionaries don't decide the truth, and the literal meaning of words doesn't describe their nature as it actually is.

But anyway, you are literally the atlantic ocean, and I say this because being deliberately stupid is an excellent way to win an argument.

just because they're normies doesn't mean they have their own version of fun, we all experience it cus we all human beans
having fun socially is different enough, I guess, but it doesn't mean you can't have fun alone

awww look it's op first "deep" thoughts keep it kiddo you might one day come up with something that isn't completely retarded

Attached: 1548720878052.jpg (1159x744, 172K)

Elliott Rodger seems to me like someone who was humiiated by his poor showing in social-leisure ("fun") activities, so he created an artificial victory by going around killing people.

It really does illustrate my point, even the down to my half-assed video game comment. The object of fun is social display of skill or prowess; video games are a simulation of that; Elliott Rodger, not content with simulations, cheated att real life by changing the rules so that he, the only one with the gun, was always the winner, at least for a day.

I don't want what he wanted, so a comparison wouldn't be valid. I don't even fully understand what he wanted.

...But he wanted what all normies want, is my point.

>Dictionaries don't decide the truth, and the literal meaning of words doesn't describe their nature as it actually is.

Words have meaning, user. Just because they don't suit whatever axe you have to grind with cosplay hoes doesn't mean you should abandon all reason. I'm a normie. Wanna know what's fun for me? drinking coffee and table top gaming. Writing short stories, playing 16 hour civilisation matches with a few friends, Reading books. Some of those activities are solitary, and there's no sort of sexual display or prowess involved, nor artifice or pretension.

and to reiterate: Yes. Dictionaries DO describe the actual nature of the words, sometimes even delving into linguistic origins. It's not that you don't 'understand' what fun is, it's that you want to find another roundabout way to express contempt for regular people-- but actually sound intelligent and meaningful instead of myopic. I applaud the attempt at a thought experiment. But you're wrong in every meaningful sense, you know that, even if you won't admit it openly-- Just say: "I don't like attention whores and show-offs", lol.

You can save yourself hours of displaying the same need for attention that you so heavily criticize.

The absence of display in one does not mean that display does not exist in others, you bald peacock.

>he couldn't have fun so he killed people
or you know it could have been the feeling of isolation and mental illness fun in the long run means very little

Attached: 1548644110654.jpg (331x480, 104K)

Yeah whatever, just tell me the name of the bitch

I was merely providing my own personal examples.

Let's skip to something we both personally enjoy: Discourse. The mere posting of your ideas was a social display of prowess on your part. You can relax, user, I'm not your enemy. I actually like you. The very process of us engaging one another is because we share this common interest.

We enjoy exploring ideas/concepts and talking them out. It's fun-- Fun doesn't have to be exciting, it's entirely dependent on the personality and the individual mind engaging into activities that pleases it.

You're actually having fun. Or you were, until I came and started raining on your parade, I apologize for that. I didn't expect you to get agitated.

Are you going to touch your dicks together now?

I too wonder what fun is.

I never seem to have pure fun anymore.

But I'm never with people I feel comfortable around in order to achieve that.

>My impression is that fun is sexual display. This is why it's not considered possible to have fun alone.
You're too delusionally wrapped up in your desire to have sex, then.
Agreed with these posters.

at base scientific level everything seems to have developed for procreation and survival - so fun, like anything else would obviously fit into this

..but art comes into things, where humans try to create meaning behind the cold reality and only those with the capacity of imagination can partake in this. before social gatherings some people would tie it into their decided life purpose of "helping others enjoy themselves", others would take photographs and try to idealise events into lasting memories, others might see it as an expression of their inner self which has innate unique value.

art > logic. your attempt to understand everything at a rational plain level and thus remove all importance from it, disqualifying yourself from the game is just a vague ego boost, jerking off to your own superior knowledge instead of delving into the far more interesting (but scary) emotional world, where none is technically superior to another.

some would look at this picture of the girl and whilst knowing its about sexual appeal, can also see it as an expression of her personality, an artful design, a characteristic pose.. these things cant be found with logic, but in the imagination where all "meaning and joy" is found...

Giga IQ. I love it. Excellent post, my man.

Attached: 1546362783221.jpg (480x640, 81K)