It's more complex.

Introduction. We definitely weren't using  deserve  in the same way and I understood  warrant  differently the first time (I edited my reply like 1 hour after posting it though). However, if you mean  justified  morally, I could only agree with you if we were talking about some type of totally unavoidable reflex, which it isn't; and/or it was the most efficient response, where I have serious doubts. I consider that we may have significantly different versions of the word  hate  too. I am going to at least clarify that, if we make a rough dichotomy of  hate  as  Feeling Only  vs  Feeling and Behavior related to it  (like hating and not doing anything or just explaining your criticism/analysis of the game vs hating and insulting, for example), I consider the second one properly wrong. The first too, but in a less drastic way, and mainly as (probably) not the most useful feeling for oneself and society. As important final note in this part I will also say that this is a b

Nota: Este texto no insinúa que las normas sociales sean negativas de por sí, sino que, a pesar de la posibilidad de llegar a ser conscientes de su carácter constructivo, en la mayoría de casos las personas no aprovechan la flexibilidad de nuestro diseñor para cuestionar sus constructos. Introducción. Desde que nacemos interactuamos interindividualmente en las diferentes subsociedades en las que nos movemos. Desde nuestra madre hasta nuestro grupo de amigos, toda combinación de 2 ó más personas podría ser un subgrupo social, subsociedad, grupo social u otro tipo de unidad social (según cómo las delimitemos). Las unidades se pueden combinar, separar, etc. En cada una, mediante un i nteraccionismo simbólico se transmiten, construyen y reconstruyen normas, y éstas, a su vez, construyen y reconstruyen a las personas. Se usaría el término  símbolos sociales (concretamente los imperantes por defecto según el contexto social-histórico en el que se haya nacido) porque las normas int

(Reply to the comment under the  previous post because of the character limit in the comments section ). Actually I am vegetarian (close to vegan in terms of diet) and do support veganism since long ago. I wouldn't be against using firearms in the wilderness as self-defense against non-human animals (which is different than hunting), as long as their habitat isn't massively invaded and there isn't any alternative, but this has little to do with such context. We already live in a civilized one among other individuals of our species who are able to internalize (at least) basic moral principles... Unlike non-human animals, which are a moral (not moral/ i mmoral), despite relative similarities in some brain parts, mostly associated with basic functions and the emotional reactions. In our context a collective trust and cooperation already exist to a considerable degree after thousands of years of social transformation (which obviously still goes on). When you walk on

Subjective. What we are discussing is already  subjective in absolute terms, wich is why I would rather discuss, as I usually say, in terms of relevant and irrelevant variables for concrete topics and subtopics, as subjective doesn't mean unapproachable or impossible to analyze/argument. The impact of the flaws. In your first tweet you say: The game deserves the hate it takes. Shortly below:  You can have multiple objective reasons why reboot was an overall downgrade to the series in several fronts, especially with gameplay. Both in terms of the game itself and how it was handled by companies does warrant hate for the game, even with expectations aside. If my inferences as to how you use these terms are correct, you imply that the mentioned reasons will have quite universal effects if properly understood, as they are relevant (analogous to the relevant variables I mentioned) in any Action Game, including the treatment of the company. After some of my argumentation: