Do you see the relationship of STAs to POTAs more like Aristotle or Nietzsche? Explain.
To answer this question first we need to know what Aristotle's or Nietzsche meaings and relationship of STA's to POTAs before we can decide if it is more like Aristotle or Nietzsche
So lets take the view point of the Aristotle perspective in Aristotle's mind it is clear that some acts remain vices irrespective of the content in which they occur, nor is the principle of the meaning applicable to them already with this Aristotle opinion would be that unequivocally that POTAs are vices and are not actions of a virtuous person
and if we use examples of theft, murder and adultery in the virtual space how would they be judge by Aristotle, we know Aristotle is concerned with being good rather than what counts as a good act. so the the issue with Aristotle is not much with whether murder is a right or wrong / good or bad, but whether engaging with murder is what the virtual person would do.
But what about Nietzsche take would be first thing pointed out is that Nietzsche proclaims that its immoral to say What is good for one is good for another so in sense for Nietzsche Morality is contingent on one's strength of will as is what should be deem moral or virtuous with the consequence of what is virtue or conversely a vice for one may be different to another.
for example in the game space world is a space where things can be completely different to our outside world. because the relationship to out actual world has been altered to fit within the story context of the game. the rules, the costumes have been altered so to the way we interact in that environment will be different. and even your avatar the embodiment of yourself will be different you will look different be given special powers even play as a different gender or sexuality this is all possible in the game space.
and it could be in that virtuous space that i am virtuous cause im big and strong and take what i want when i want it
so with these two viewpoints in mind i would have to go with Nietzsche stance rather than Aristotle for the relationship of STA's to POTA's
why you may ask just simply but its hard to justify with the statement What is good for one is good for another as its what could be good in the game space which is not real like you need to steal a powerful weapon to defeat the next boss just with that the act of stealing in Aristotle's view is moral bad even thou it can be justified and in that world in his eyes it is still wrong regardless if its in that world or this
your actions in this game space is not hurting anyone as its not like for instance you need to attack someone in this game space cause they are in your path its not like you would perform that same act in the real world its just like viewing a tv show or film that has violence or shows something that fits into the story but would not work in our actual space.
Aristotle's Argument i can understand his point of view but would disagree with in the terms of this question as i have played games that i have killed people, stolen from people and i have never expressed the desire to go out and commit these in real life just like i have driven a formula one car in the game space does not mean im going to jump into the a formula one car and win the championship or i have played football manager does not give me the expertise to go and manage a professional football club.
the view of Sicart also backs this up with the view of "the moral being who understands the contingency relation is free to experience the game space without the threat of the practice having leading to a detrimental change in virtuousness"
the only question i would take from this what if you are doing these acts to a fellow player in this game space and not characters that are being controlled by the computer but are in control of another player?
No comments:
Post a Comment