Car enthusiasts are mostly about making something look cool and have certain stats, it’s about fun not utility.

I won't tell others how to live their lives, but I think this has more value than how to optimally crush candies for example

All 4 examples main benefit is knowledge to be used later.

People who fish with a pole rarely catch more than the investment made into their gear and bait.

I'm sure others will disagree but I believe playing video games for hours is more infantilizing than hunting, fishing, or tinkering on cars.

The former is content designed by humans (generally working under the aegis of giant corporations) whose goal is to completely capture and dominate your attention to the exclusion of other things. While videogames certainly can be and often are art that tells interesting stories about the human condition, they also often function psychologically much more like junk food and drugs. They give you just enough serotonin hit to get you to keep playing but rarely enough to leave you truly sated. Many games don't want to satisfy because then you'll stop consuming the content.

Hunting and fishing require you to be in nature which has been proven in study after study to be profoundly valuable psychologically and emotionally. They are both boring in a deeply useful way that gives you time to reflect and process your own thoughts. Instead of doom scrolling social media which constantly fills your brain with new information, stressors, and problems that you never have time to sift through, hunting and fishing give your brain the idle time it needs to finally start defragging its memory.

Tinkering on cars forces you to solve difficult challenges. Unlike playing videogames where the stakes are by design relatively low—all you can lose is time—working on a car forces you to confront difficulty and failure where that matters. You can break parts that are expensive to replace. You can fail to find a problem and be left with a car that won't run. That's very helpful for training resilience, problem-solving and equanimity.

All three of these engage our entire bodies, senses, and hands in an integrated, much deeper way than a controller and rectangle of pixels does. The smell of oil or seaweed. The flash of a bobber. The way you feel the pull of the fish in your arms or the recoil of the rifle in your shoulders.

This is something we all know intuitively and it's the constant onslaught of capitalism and the ease of consuming media at home that makes us forget. Videogames can certainly have moments of meaningful joy. But ask yourself this: How often after sinking an hour into a game do you find yourself thinking, "Wow, that really felt like living!" Now how often do you feel that when you go fishing, or hike, or cook a meal for a friend?

For me, 80% of the time I spend playing videogames or watching dumb social media leaves me with the same lingering regret I feel when I eat a bag of chips instead of preparing an actually nutritious meal.

I think this very well might be the major difference between those pursuits and screen media. The latter can not yet both simulate those experiences and stimulate the body at the same time.

This distinction between physical experiences from those that solely stimulate the mind, I feel, is the only way you can prioritize the worthiness of one over the other. Certainly it feels exhausting to have consumed a bunch of content that stimulated the mind while the body was immobile the entire time, yes. But I think any further value judgments between the two are subject and based on one's own moral philosophy. In many cases, examples of the "real" can be as morally judged against. For instance, the idea of billionaires and politicians buying lavish ranches and then mugging for the camera while they're playacting as farmers and cowboys when they are just living out a caricature of real labor.

If the key difference between the physical and the purely intellectual is the lack of effects on the former, one wonders if the end goal will be to be able to stimulate the body while the mind is being stimulated (even if only by simulation), or deeper and invasive forms of mind stimulation that make it appear as if the body has been stimulated as well. Rest assured, our top giant corporations are working on this problem even as we speak.

So all of modern TV is the same? Is watching cable news infantilizing? I feel like we're watering down to "infantilizing" to mean "things I don't feel good things towards".

> Hunting and fishing require you to be in nature which has been proven in study after study to be profoundly valuable psychologically and emotionally.

Again, this whole paragraph is unrelated to the question, right? Physical activity is related to those things a well, but people would argue that playing a game of hopscotch is childish. As well, my grandfather isn't what I would describe as the picture of mental health.

> You can fail to find a problem and be left with a car that won't run. That's very helpful for training resilience, problem-solving and equanimity.

I mean, you just described computer tinkering and problem solving as well.

> The smell of oil or seaweed. The flash of a bobber. The way you feel the pull of the fish in your arms or the recoil of the rifle in your shoulders.

Again, the topic is infantilizing. You're romanticizing.

> "Wow, that really felt like living!" Now how often do you feel that when you go fishing, or hike, or cook a meal for a friend?

Never? I sincerely hated fishing growing up and have found I'm not much of a hiker.

I believe that spending significant time on things that aren't meaningfully enriching and tend to leave you feeling regretful is immature. Obviously, everyone needs some time to veg. I'm not saying everyone's gotta be trying to level up and hustle 24/7.

But if you're spending hours every day watching superhero shows you don't really care about or grinding videogames alone with little sense of accomplishment, I think that demonstrates a lack of maturity that I would consider infantile. And I deeply believe that the aforementioned media is designed to make you do that. These shows and games are deliberately structured for binging and grinding. They want you to turn off your executive reasoning and get you to make short-term selfish choices around comfort and complacency. They want consumers.

So, in that sense, yes, I believe that media is infantilizing.

Both in the process of tinkering, and out of frustration when stuff goes wrong. So, also developing a bit of anger management skill. :)

I prefer video games over most outdoors activities but still largely agree with you.

One minor critique is that I would substitute "infantilizing" for "psychologically beneficial." I also think the gap in inherent value between the two groups of activities could be summarized into the tendency of screen-based activities to produce instant gratification with minimal discernible gain. The latter group activities involve aspects of mindfulness and require a degree of active physical/mental labor over time, therefore you could argue less "outdoor-sy" creative efforts like painting, long-form writing, or sewing could all provide the same benefits.

I believe they're designed to do that, which is why I think they're infantilizing. They encourage us to do adopt an unhealthy short-term gratification selfish comfort mindset.

Wow, that escalated quickly. TIL I'm Hitler.

I don't think this is at all "something we all know intuitively". It also applies to basically any kind of content consumption, including reading books, listening to opera, or watching any kind of cinema. These don't "engage our entire bodies, senses, and hands", and yet they can be valuable activities that enrich us greatly. At the same time I don't get a lot out of sitting around in a boat for hours; if I want to be left alone to my thoughts I'd rather be on a walk (which I'd argue doesn't necessarily engage my entire body either -- I'm generally lost in thought and have no idea what my body's doing while on a walk).

There's really nothing special about an activity being tactile. I can solve a problem in my own head without touching a damned thing. And watching good movies, or playing good video games, can engage my imagination and help me be more empathic or a better problem solver.

Also, I can play video games without brutally murdering a living creature that feels pain, so that's nice.

I really do, in the same way that a satisfying nutritious meal feels different after you're done eating it than a meal of junk food does.

> It also applies to basically any kind of content consumption, including reading books, listening to opera, or watching any kind of cinema.

I was pretty careful to say that not all "content" is like this (though anything that we'd naturally refer to as "content" instead of a "work of art" is probably telling us something). It's certainly the case that there are books, films, shows, and videogames that are meaningful and enriching. There's also 50 Shades of Gray, whatever Michael Bay's latest thing is, Jersey Shore, and Candy Crush.

The form of the media isn't the point, it's the merit of the actual content.

> These don't "engage our entire bodies, senses, and hands", and yet they can be valuable activities that enrich us greatly.

Sure, not every meaningful activity has to tick every box. But it's good to spend your time on things that tick at least some of them. Binge watching completely forgettable superhero series or grinding pointless quests on an MMO are doing little more than fast-forwarding someone towards their death. I of course respect their choice to do that, but my opinion is that choosing to spend signicant time doing that is infantile, just as eating chicken tendies and soda for every meal is.

> At the same time I don't get a lot out of sitting around in a boat for hours; if I want to be left alone to my thoughts I'd rather be on a walk (which I'd argue doesn't necessarily engage my entire body either -- I'm generally lost in thought and have no idea what my body's doing while on a walk).

I only used those specific examples because those are the ones the parent comment used. Find whatever activities are meaningful and rewarding to you. I just hope you're able to find some instead of burning your free time in a mindless fugue of media consumption which is all too easy to do these days.

> I can play video games without brutally murdering a living creature that feels pain, so that's nice.

If you've ever seen me fish, you'd know that harm to fish is rarely involved. In fact, most days there is no fish participation at all.

Playing video games is occasionally associated with the NEET crowd, likely because of the low barrier to entry in terms of experience.

Exploring nature and working on mechanical things requires some prior knowledge, experience and/or space to get started.

Likewise, access to uncontaminated nature in large population centres is harder than it was when rural populations outnumbered the people living in urban environments.

Bikes, on the other hand, are great for tinkering and also small enough to be compatible with modern living. These, however, might not be accessible for someone with a low level of fitness and willpower to attain that fitness.