tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1780806945960886534.post2691411646542038790..comments2024-03-28T05:47:54.177+00:00Comments on Philosophical Disquisitions: The Gamer's Dilemma: Virtual Murder versus Virtual Paedophilia (Part One)John Danaherhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06761686258507859309noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1780806945960886534.post-35350773159318858992021-04-02T00:33:36.429+01:002021-04-02T00:33:36.429+01:00In regards to moral character, there's an Amer...In regards to moral character, there's an American Dad! episode where Roger discovers that he literally needs to always be a jerk and an asshole if he actually wants to continue living:<br /><br />https://americandad.fandom.com/wiki/Frannie_911<br /><br />"Francine comes up with an elaborate plan to reunite Stan and Roger after a big fight. She fakes Roger's kidnapping in the hopes of showing Roger that Stan still cares about him, but when Stan never shows up to pay the ransom, he simply delayed. Once she realizes that Stan knew all along, she confronts Roger in the hotel he was staying in, telling him that either he'd be nice or he's out of the house. It forces Roger to rethink the way he treats people. For at least a year, he had been nice. However, it turns out that being nice is deadly to Roger's physiology, noted by a flower slowly dying. On his deathbed, he reveals that his species had to be jerks otherwise he'll die."<br /><br />Would you force Roger to always be nice even if doing this will literally cause Roger to die?Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01184822261811827197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1780806945960886534.post-24948433255819043322021-04-02T00:31:24.453+01:002021-04-02T00:31:24.453+01:00"Furthermore, Luck notes a potential countera..."Furthermore, Luck notes a potential counterargument. Suppose it was found that virtual performances of an immoral act actually reduced the likelihood of real performances. Would we then have to conclude that virtual performances were permissible? This is a serious objection since there is, arguably, some plausibility to the claim that the virtual performance provides an “outlet” for immoral desires."<br /><br />There's also another argument to consider here: Specifically, what if performing a particular act (at least virtually) was actually necessary in order for one to achieve human flourishing? For instance, imagine a person who became permanently and irreversibly depressed and even suicidal (comparable to the state of some/many transgender people if they can NEVER actually transition) if they could never play any video games that simulated the Holocaust. In such a scenario, we would have to legitimately wonder whether having this person be permanently and irreversibly depressed and even suicidal (and, obviously, completely non-functional) would actually be preferable to this person being happy, healthy, and functional while also playing a video game (or whatever) that simulates the Holocaust on a regular basis. I myself had plenty of Jewish relatives who were murdered in the Holocaust (specifically in the Sarny, Ukraine area), but I would be MUCH less willing to actually ban a video game that simulates the Holocaust if this game was actually necessary for some people's flourishing.<br /><br />And this would go back to discussions about moral character: Would you prefer someone to have a good moral character but to be depressed, suicidal, and non-functional or a bad moral character but be happy, healthy, and functional? Assuming that they weren't actually hurting anyone in either of these two scenarios, that is. Personally, I would prefer the latter scenario here since it would result in much less harm to them themselves while also not reducing the amount of harm for anyone else.<br /><br />I also have serious objections to the idea of criminalizing both virtual pedophilia and child sex dolls/child sex robots without a REALLY good reason (such as an increased risk of ACTUAL harm, based on ACTUAL evidence as opposed to merely conjecture) when two or more consenting adults can already engage in sex acts that simulate rape and/or pedophilia. There is rape fantasy role-playing, for instance, and some adults could have a very childlike appearance (for instance, an 18 year old looking like they're 12 years old instead), thus allowing people with pedophilic inclinations to have completely consensual sex with them while imagining that they are actually having sex with a child. Should completely consensual sex acts between two or more adults that simulate rape and/or pedophilia likewise be criminalized? After all, we already criminalize adult incest even when it's genuinely completely consensual on the part of all of the parties who are involved in this. So, based on the desensitivization argument, why not criminalize this as well? Seriously.Coyotehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01184822261811827197noreply@blogger.com