Jaws vs. Alien

Another video of people getting away completely unharmed, good stuff. I like these videos because they support everything I've been saying.

I found an interesting video. I didn't realize how docile sharks can be.



In this one they wear full protective gear, but I've also seen videos where divers aren't wearing any head protection, and only partial body protection with even more sharks than this swarming all around them.

I would just like to say that you didn't have a point avout witchcraft, you were simply poking at my theology (in a manner irrelevant to the discussion) so if you wanted to play that game, I gave you semantics. It doesn't matter if I believe in witches or aliens.

And I'd like to point out that you brought this into semantics in the first place with the whole spiel about spirits being aliens. You can't have your cake and eat it too, I'm afraid. If you want to get nitpicky, I can get nitpicky.

If you don't want to continue the discussion that's fine but your reason for discontinuing is really not relevant. I'm not the one who took the discussion off the rails.

I fear both the unknown and the thought-to-be known. The rarity and unpredictability in Bruce's behavior is what the fear is derived from- when you think you know something but you're proven wrong.

Furthermore, your videos on docile sharks don't prove anything because they don't disprove the existence of aggressive sharks. If I show you a video of a friendly puppy, I'd still be just as wary of a Rottweiler with rabies. Your videos can't counter anecdotal and film evidence of shark attacks because all sharks are not created equal in temperament, as it is also with humans and puppies.

And just because you aren't personally scared of sharks doesn't automatically discredit the effectiveness of a killer shark. A person can still be afraid of a serial killer without being afraid of the entire human race.

Perfect response.

Here's a documentary on great white sharks that actually talks about Jaws. I'm not finished watching it yet. I'm watching it right now. Here is an interesting quote so far though:

"We talk about Jaws as this Hollywood production that was fantasy, and if we look at all the elements of Jaws we see really many parts of it that are somewhat true."

That is as far as I'm willing to go with Jaws until I see further evidence otherwise, but this statement is from a shark expert. Among shark experts there seems to be this prevalent thought that Jaws is just fantasy, and even some experts seem surprised that it actually is "somewhat" true. So, it's somewhat true, and I've never said anything contrary to that as far as I recall.

I find this extremely disrespectful. I most certainly did have a point.


I think this is a false assumption.

I thought it was relevant.

I don't know what game you're talking about, but if you feel I've wronged you then please forgive me and try to understand that it does not give you the right to hurt me back.

I disagree.

Yes, but I did not ignore your point. I tried to address an issue, and you apparently consider that issue irrelevant while I consider it relevant. I was not complaining that you merely argued semantics, but that you did so to ignore my point. And I already tried to point that out, which you again ignored. So everything I say is going ignored, and there is no communication between us, thus we can not have a real conversation. I think you aren't even actually talking to me, you're just talking at me.

I think you've misunderstood the irony of this catch phrase.

It is relevant because you can't have a discussion with me if I stop talking to you.

I don't consider completely ignoring everything I say a discussion. It was never on the rails in the first place. I'm trying to get the train out of the station, but soon I will give up if there's no progress.

I consider the thought-to-be-known and the unknown the exact same thing.

Who's Bruce? Sorry, I'm not sure what you're talking about here.

It proves that sharks can be docile. It also proves that when you know how to protect yourself and understand the behavior of sharks there is much less to fear. The real fear is not knowing what to do if a shark attacks you. If you know what to do, like wear chain-mail, then you won't be as afraid. This is what I mean by the known versus the unknown. If you don't know anything about sharks then your imagination may make up all kinds of fears. If you understand them then you fear them less. It's like firefighters running into a burning building while everyone else is running out screaming. Well, I hope you won't ignore that point.

What I'm actually trying to do is disprove the existence of a shark as aggressive as the one the movie Jaws portrays, and that's why I posted multiple videos and a whole documentary. I even posted more aggressive shark attacks than anyone else.

Agreed. Did I post a video of a friendly baby shark, or did I post a video that also had people wearing chainmail and surrounded by a ton of adult sharks teaching you how to make sharks docile? If you watch a video that teaches you how to deal with rabid dogs will you still be just as scared, or will you have some confidence in that situation?

I know that, but that's not what I was trying to counter. What I don't believe is that sharks are just as scary as alien monsters. The belief I am unwilling to suspend for the movie Jaws, is that a great white shark will prey on humans and do this to a boat:



The reason why that is somewhat scary is because it looks like a real shark. This is not as scary:



Actually I am somewhat afraid of sharks. I'm just more afraid of the unknown.

I see your point about serial killers, and I agree. However I do feel this is a moot point, because a person can also be afraid of serial killers and the entire human race. I am afraid of the entire human race because anyone can be a serial killer, but I'm less afraid after taking Taekwondo, because now I know how to defend myself.

The effectiveness of a killer shark is truly something to behold. My point was that Jaws is exaggerated and Alien was not exaggerated. That is why I liked Alien more, and why I think it is a scarier movie than Jaws. We will have no argument or debate if you simply say something to the effects of, "Okay, I see what you're saying." But if you disagree with me and want to make counter points to what I'm saying then I hope you won't be surprised if I attempt to defend my arguments and refute your counter points with counter points of my own. However, if you just want to criticise me and then ignore everything I say, I won't talk to you much longer.

Since you say you're a Christian, I do have some hope that we might reach common ground and find mutual respect. I am trying to respect you (maybe I'm not very good at it, so I'm sorry if you feel I'm not respecting you). I am trying to listen to you and understand you (it's hard to understand what you're getting at sometimes, and it's frustrating putting in effort to a post and getting ignored as a response). I am trying not to ignore any of your points, but actually address them (even if you feel I am not doing so). Please don't just assume I'm not, and use that as an excuse to be rude to me and insult me. That's all I ask. If you can do that then I think we can have a productive discussion and come to understand one another. But for the record, I do not believe you are a Christian just because you claim to be one. Where is your brotherly love for me? I do not see it yet, but I hope and pray that it is there. Regardless, as I have expressed that you've hurt my feelings and disrespected me, I do forgive you.

Let's address your personal issues first before we get into the actual debate.

I ignored any points I thought not worthwhile to the discussion and at no point did I think you wronged me in any way, nor vice-versa. This is an Internet discussion and you've been very respectful. I apologize if I've hurt your feelings but you're taking things a bit seriously here ^_^

You seem to be rather pained over my "lack of respect" and "brotherly love"- I'd like to say that while I apologize for any hurt feelings I also would like to point out that I've not been overtly insulting, Saying "That's a flawed argument/that's irrelevant" isn't being disrespectful, especially if you explain why. Ad hominems are, however, and you're the closest to have used any ad hominems in this discussion with your comments on my personal character. In fact, in your previous discussions with other users on my post, you have used overt ad hominems.

I find it a bit silly to judge somebody's "level" of Christianity on the basis of an Internet debate. It'd be like observing a child tell a lie and then say "He's not Christian, he lied!" when the truth is, nobody's perfect. I could point out that you're not Christian by saying that you broke the rule to "Judge not, lest ye be judged" or "He who has no sin, cast the first stone", but that would be hypocritical of me- and besides, I have absolutely no opinion of how Christian you are because I don't know a single thing about you personally. It'd amusing that you assume otherwise about me.

I could very easily say that, in the same vein, you've been disrespectful when you said "this debate's not going anywhere" because that'd mean you're brushing my arguments off as pointless. But I won't do that and I don't even feel the need to do that, because, just like my statement that your point was irrelevant, it's subjective. Just because we disagree on an opinionated matter on the nature of your argument doesn't mean that there's any disrespect involved.

And my words may sound passively malevolent at times, but that's just how I debate. I apologize if it comes off as harsh or malicious.

What? You've never wronged me. I'm simply saying that if you want to get nitpipcky with my theology- with witchcraft and spirits/aliens- you shouldn't criticize me for pointing out that Saul did not talk to a witch, because both cases are that of semantics. We could, again, have a very interesting debate about whether or not spirits are aliens, and we could have a very interesting discussion on your point about witchcraft but I simply chose not to. I apologize if you felt ignored.

Again, I ignored any points I felt irrelevant. It's not like you had a killer justification about Jaws not being scary in your point about witchcraft. I'd been trying to say all along that knowing an explanation for Jaws would take away part of what makes the shark so scary. It doesn't need an in-world explanation (such as "witchcraft") because the story suffers for it, and that's where the completely subjective case of suspension of disbelief works wonders for me (although I know it doesn't for you, which is fine). You've brushed off my understanding of suspension of disbelief even though it was perfectly valid (I even gave you evidence from the article you were referencing). However, I don't consider that offensive or hurtful- it's just in the nature of a debate.

Really? I don't think so. The gist of what I was trying to say (incorrect/correct as it may be), was that "you can't use semantics and then criticize me for using semantics". And yes, I understand that you were doing that to point out that I'd ignored your point.

I can't argue with that.

That's your opinion, and again I'm not going to say "that's disrespectful" even if some people like yourself would consider it such.

I think they're similar but not one and the same. Regardless, Jaws constitutes as the former, since you'd think you know how a shark acts, but then it shatters your confidence as it acts in an unpredicted fashion. For the unknown, you don't have any clue how it acts to begin with. Therefore it doesn't shatter your confidence because you don't have any to begin with.

Bruce is the main antagonist of Jaws.

I'm glad you used the analogy of firefighters because just like sharks, fire can still be incredibly dangerous regardless of how well equipped and trained you are. Firefighters get killed all the time.

Posting videos of docile sharks isn't relevant because:

A. Just because it's not on footage doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Giant squid are thought to be able to grow to 40 feet or more, but we've never had footage of one that size. Does it mean that it doesn't exist? No. It proves nothing about the existence of a creature.

To make my argument on that matter I can't simply post a bunch of videos with giant squid and say "See? They're all under 40 feet! Therefore your argument that there can be 40 feet squids is incorrect!" In reality, all my videos are completely irrelevant. The same can be said when gauging the aggressiveness of a shark because your videos are all of the typical sharks when Bruce is obviously no typical shark- both in size and in temperament.

You can't post videos of normal people going about their day to disprove the existence of serial killers, because serial killers are likely not "normal" humans.

B. Because the medium we're dealing with is fiction, the purported creature doesn't even need to exist. It simply has to be able to exist.

If I said, "There's a dude out there named Jack the Ripper who goes around stabbing people" you wouldn't say "No! That's impossible, all the people I know are very kind and compassionate and would never do such a thing!" because Jack the Ripper isn't like most people.

A great white is certainly capable of turning a small fishing boat into matchsticks and attack humans. Whether it'd willfully and aggressively do so or not is up for debate and I personally find the fact that sharks are not known to attack humans willfully makes Bruce all the scarier. It's probably the opposite for you but that's where our paths diverge. They're completely subjective opinions, nothing to argue about here.

Bruce's exceptional temperament makes him part of the unknown.

"I am afraid of the entire human race because anyone can be a serial killer"
I'm at a lack of understanding as to how this pertains to my statement that "a person can be scared of serial killers but not the entire human race". This was to argue that even a person not scared of sharks can be scared of Bruce. I don't see how your point counterargues that.

"I'm less afraid after taking Taekwondo, because now I know how to defend myself"
Very debatable, and it'd be a fun discussion to have as irrelevant as it is. This statement actually makes your point weaker due to how debatable it is- if you had made a very inarguable statement like "I'm less afraid after carrying a gun" it'd be far more effective. But that's beside the point.

And I've already addressed a similar point with your firefighter scenario so please don't feel like I'm ignoring this by not directly arguing against it.t

"However, if you just want to criticise me and then ignore everything I say, I won't talk to you much longer" If I were you I'd find this very offensive since I don't feel like I've been doing that (whether I actually have or not is besides the point). But I really don't, since it's how you feel- just like how I felt one of your points was irrelevant, you have the right to feel that all I've done was criticize and ignore.

The beauty of Jaws is that because Bruce is readily within the realms of nature (a point that I've already built), he very well may not be exaggerated. We just don't know, and your videos can't disprove that.

Final question: Is The Exorcist an effective film? Many people consider it to be one of the most effective horror movies of all time, myself included, REGARDLESS of belief in demons or lack thereof. You don't need to be scared by demons to be thrilled by this film. You don't even need to believe they exist or that they'd act like that.

Similarly, you don't need to believe that a massive man-eating boat chomper exists to enjoy the film.

The Exorcist is EXTREMELY exaggerated- nobody debates that. Even if it really did happen, the film portrays the events in pure Hollywood style. And it works. It may not be realistic but it works splendidly.

And the exact same thing goes to Jaws. May or may not be able to happen, exaggeration of possibly true events, realistic effects for a possibly fictional creature, etc.

If you don't like the Exorcist then this is where we'll just have to disagree, there's a level of suspension of disbelief required to enjoy these films that you may not have.

I've not finished reading your post yet, but one thing I want to say off the bat is just because you don't consider something disrespectful doesn't mean it isn't disrespectful. If you ignore a point you don't think is relevant, everyone does that myself included. If someone makes a point and you say they didn't, that is disrespectful. I'll read the rest and respond later.

Which is exactly why I apologized. I wouldn't have done so if I didn't consider this.

By the way, my original response has been edited with additional points in case you've already started addressing them.

I don't know... I'm going to need more time to think about it, and there is a lot to go through. I'm just really stressed out. What bothers me the most is just not being understood, and I think the majority of your post, Achoo, is based on misunderstandings. I want to resolve the issues so we can communicate effectively, but it's painful to read all of that. For one thing I never made any assumptions about whether you're a Christian or not. What I was trying to say is that I'm not simply going to take your word for it. The logical fallacy name dropping doesn't help either because you end up committing metafallacies. But I think you aren't really reading my posts carefully, and that does make me wonder if there's any point in responding. Why respond when you'll just misunderstand my response? I just feel like shutting down.

Also, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_of_Endor

I was talking with a friend about Aristotle. The fear of the unknown is an assumption of danger right? When facing death he treated it like being in one room and opening a door and going into another room. There is no reason to fear because you don't know if there will be danger or not. So you make no assumptions and you have no fear. If you see a shark you don't fear until it tries to bite you, because it most likely will swim past you since humans are not their natural prey. Maybe the Alien is scary because it kind of looks like a deep sea monster, like a pelican gulper eel or something...

I guess I have been missunderstanding a lot myself, and making a lot of assumptions, and projecting that onto others. I still have a lot to digest and learn. It is stressful though and I have a lot of emotional pain. It doesn't help when people like Larry ridicule me. But I will just ignore him. Or maybe I should just be more tollerant of him. But I really didn't appreciate being told to shut up twice while he kept going and quoting me even after claiming to have stopped.

You’re a strange one.

Both movies had to grapple with an artificially created monster they were presenting that audiences could've jeered and laughed at. Both movies took great pains to show the monster less than, perhaps, they even wanted to, in the planning stages of the production. But to me, JAWS is the more commercial product. It's Alien, really, that's taking the greater risk by showing a Sci-Fi future in a way that audiences were definitely not used to seeing, by that time. Audiences being very unimpressed by the fact that Sigourney's not made up all glamoursly, that everything's kind of dark, it's hard to see what's going on, sometimes. Everything looks disrespected, almost, and certainly lived in, except maybe the kitchen areas and things like that. So, to me, the risks that Alien took make it the better movie, because it was very successful with the chances it took. It ended up becoming a game-changer in terms of the Art of cinema. JAWS was a game changer in terms of the marketing side of cinema.

I have no idea why this is so even, because they're not remotely in the same league. Jaws was great for it's time, it's still a good movie, but Alien is an absolute masterpiece of cinema.

Spielberg is more popular and easier to digest i guess.

Wow look what I found a shark breaks into a diving cage. Like the scene in Jaws. Wow that’s scary. So do ppl think the shark learnt from the movie jaws maybe spoke to the shark actor who played Bruce and then copied him to get some attention as he knew they were filming?

I wonder if he pooped himself. I would have.

Lol.

I have actually swum with sharks but it wasnt wiith cages where they were in distress, or with great whites. Still, i think its amazing how that guy kept his cool.

Yea it would have been terrifying for him. That’s cool Dani I’d like to do that one day too (swim with sharks).

They were pretty nice, larry, once i got over my pesky fear, but one off the buckdt list. I would do it again, though.
Was that video taken in south africa?

True on your last point- Spielberg films tend to have that "movie magic" about it that grabs general audiences more than just sheer technical brilliance does. His exception to that is Saving Private Ryan, which is done in such a raw and detailed fashion that I was simply blown away purely by the technical aspects.