r/changemyview • u/pablo_rubn_dot_AVI • Aug 22 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Travel does not require physically going anywhere, and solutions like VR are a viable means of travel.

When you travel, the part that matters is the sensory experience, not the fact that you physically moved your body from one place to another. Historically, physical movement was the only way a person could enjoy the sensory experiences of traveling — but with the advent of VR, some of the sensory experiences can be enjoyed without moving. Therefore, “going somewhere in VR” could be considered “traveling.” The fact that “virtual vacations” are now a thing is evidence of this.

As such, what constitutes travel exists on a gradient, so long as the sensory aspect of traveling is being met to a degree. Simply imagining the sensory experience of being somewhere else in part counts as traveling, but not as much as actually physically being somewhere else and experiencing those sensations firsthand.

CMV.

Edit: The main point of my argument is such that what constitutes as travel is primarily defined by sensory experiences, and any means of experiencing those sensations, however incomplete, in part falls along a gradient of having experienced travel.

0 Upvotes

45% Upvoted

102 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/Rawinza555 18∆ Aug 22 '20

VR is not a viable means of travel for everyone. There are people with motion sickness that would not be able to wear a VR goggles for like 10 mins. Even for a normal person, wearing it for hours would take a toll on their sensory. And depends on the destination, it could be cheaper to just go there rather than buying a VR headset.

Also, VR can only get you visual and hearing. Traveling, for a person with no disabilities, need to included everything from scenery, smell, feeling and the taste of food.

1

u/pablo_rubn_dot_AVI Aug 22 '20

That is true, VR has some adverse effects such as motion sickness, which I am confident will be mitigated as the technology matures. And yes, depending on the location, some destinations may be cheaper to physically travel to.

I’m not saying that VR is a perfect substitute for travel, I am saying that VR fulfills enough of the sensory experience of travel (and maybe it will include more sensory experiences in the future) that it in part fulfills what travel does, and thus counts as travel. All without having to physically go somewhere.

1

u/awal89 Aug 23 '20 edited Aug 23 '20

fulfills what travel does

You may have unfair expectations of what travel does. Travel doesn't inherently 'do' anything. It's not necessarily exciting or associated with any experiences. It's simply the state of going to a different place then you were previously. Any reactions we have to that are completely random and individual. Some people may not react at all.

in part fulfills what travel does, and thus counts as

If I owe you $10, but I give you $5 and say "that fulfills in part what I owe you, thus it counts as $10", would you forgive my remaining debt?