Media Law and Ethics – Week 12

Find, read and post to your blog at least two articles on topics relating to ethics in games that we have not covered in class (almost anything except STAs and POTAs).

Ethical gaming: can video games be a force for good?

Moral Decision Making in Fallout

Ref:

The Guardian. 2014. Ethical gaming: can video games be a force for good?. [online]. Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/12/ethical-video-gaming-games-for-change-festival [Accessed 28th Mar 16].

Game Studies. 2009. Moral Decision Making in Fallout. [online]. Available from: http://gamestudies.org/0902/articles/schulzke [Accessed 28th Mar 16].

 

 

Media Law and Ethics – Week 11

In this week, is to read the eighth chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer one question which provided.

Do you see the relationship of STAs to POTAs more like Aristotle or Nietzsche?

The answer is YES. There are two standard, the first is when human moral applies to human world which is correct, when human moral applies to game’s world which is unacceptable. Second, when game’s moral applies to game world which is correct as well,  when game’s moral applies to reality which is unacceptable.

The different betweens game’s world and human world is they have different environment, which is game’s world can be customize and human world don’t.

So, the question led us to ask more question.

What’s the standard of good or bad in game or in reality?

For example, killing someone is bad in reality, but is it killing makes the player bad in game? The answer is NO.

There’s a game called Bloodborne, which player needs to defeat a boss to continue to the next area, in this case, killing is acceptable. In the game, killing can obtain souls (in-game currency), which killing as a reward in-game.

For another example, run over people with vehicles is morally wrong in reality, but running over people with vehicles in a mission in-game is morally correct, because is a mission and is in-game feature. In my opinion, run over people with vehicles in-game does not make me to run over people in reality, only the person is morally corrupt will be trigger and make the action.

Ref:

Bloodbrone. 2015. [computer game]. Sony PlayStation 4. FromSoftware.

GTA V. 2013. [computer game]. Sony PlayStation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360. Rockstar North.

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Media Law and Ethics – Week 9

In this week, is to read the seventh chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer one question which provided.

If you accept that it is OK to kill random people in a video game (if you do not think it is OK feel free to argue this point), would it be OK to seek out to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game? Why? Please site the reading to support your response. 

Before I answer this question, I would like to share my point of view.

Is it ok to kill random people in a video game? Well, it depends on the setting of the game. For example, to kill random people in GTA is acceptable cause the game setting is allow us to do such things, but you will be chased by cops, it is punishment in game (Wanted level) and similar as real world, the player have to take responsibility on what they are doing.

So, as long as the game setting is allow us to kill random people, is understandable and also, some player will kill random people as releasing their daily pressure in game, cause they can do something which they not allow to do in real life, similar to other people will go to bowling centre or have a drink in bar for release their pressure.

Back to topic

The question is, would it be OK to seek out to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game?

The answer is no. The reason is the people are targeting to specific group of people and this is called R.A.C.I.S.T. When the player is targeting to specific group, is means the player against the group and also means humanity corrupted. For example, There is a news which saying a local clerk refused to sign the marriage licenses due to the reason of  against her religion.

Here is the link:

Rand Paul on Gay Marriage Clerk

The woman were released.

So, targeting and kill only individuals identified as homosexual in game is wrong, but same as targeting other groups of people as well. At the end, there is no true or false for the question, only based on personal regions and experiences.

Ref:

GTA V. 2013. [computer game]. Sony PlayStation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360. Rockstar North.

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Rand Paul 2016. 2015. Rand Paul on Gay Marriage Clerk, Hillary Clinton, and Iran Deal (Fox News). [online]. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wBttZ85LSw [Accessed 7th Mar 16].

 

 

Media Law and Ethics – Week 8

In this week, is to read the sixth chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer three questions which provided.

What is Power’s argument for moral policing in computer games?

Doing something or work on something which is against taboo activities. When people playing or investigate computer games, it should look wider pictures or consider to look at different point of views, instead focusing single point of the game. For example, the computer games like Saints Row series, people is able to kill everyone in the games and this is encouraging people to kill whatever is in the street, no matter is polices or civilians.

What is meant by the term ‘morally corrupt’?

If a person is ‘morally corrupt’, which means the person have bad moral. For example, if the person is ‘morally corrupt’, which he/her may think is fine to run over someone with car, didn’t stop the car when the traffic light is red, throw a flower pot from higher floor..etc.

Is it fun to ‘break taboos’? Use arguments from the chapter to support your position.

The answer is YES. It allows people to try something or do something which is not able to do in real life.There is one of the point that I really agree with.

Thomas Nys states in the book that “My first claim is that an inquiry into this appeal will reveal that their enjoyment presupposes a moral awareness, and therefore that morality is included from the start. Knowing that it is wrong is part of the fun and games. the thrill of such virtual actions is precisely that they transgress ethical boundaries.”.

The player knows is immoral but still playing the games and break taboos. For example, games like Grand Theft Auto series, the game gives player a free range of play styles, can be good or evil person. A lot of people decided to run over people with different vehicles, kill prostitutes after sex, rob convenient stores, hit and run, shoot and kill polices…etc. So, breaking taboos will increase the fun in the games even is wrong.

Ref:

GTA V. 2013. [computer game]. Sony PlayStation 3 and Microsoft Xbox 360. Rockstar North.

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Saints Row: The Third. 2011. [computer game]. Sony PlayStation 3, Microsoft Xbox 360 and Windows. Volition.

 

Media Law and Ethics – Week 6

In this week, is to read the fifth chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer two question which provided.

What is Utilitarianism?

“Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the best moral action is the one that maximizes utility.”

-Wikipedia.org (2016)

Utilitarianism is depending for the output to judge is good or bad. If the person lies to other person because that person is unhappy all the time, the lie is good. On the other hand, if the person lies to other person about that person’s family is dead, the lie is bad..

There are three different form of Utilitarianism:

  • Act Utilitarianism
  • Rule Utilitarianism
  • General Utilitarianism

 

Act Utilitarianism

For example, if the person cross the street when the light is red, which allows him/her to save extra time and this will reach the maximum effect of saving time. Which the case is acceptable when the case applies to act utilitarianism.

Rule Utilitarianism

When the same case applies to rule utilitarianism, if everyone can follow the sign and cross the street and this will greatly reduce the traffic accidents. To maximize of avoiding traffic accidents, the person should follow the rule. In this case, the person didn’t follow the sign and cross the street, which is unacceptable.

General Utilitarianism

If everyone follows his/her own ethics knowledge, which everyone to maximize their performances or efforts,  the world will turning chaos.

The main purpose of general utilitarianism is to reminding us to think careful before action.

 

How does one decide which pleasure is preferred?

In this world, there is a lot of things to make person to reach maximum happiness, cash, car, house..etc. These will make the person happy in short term.

But only few things is allow to pass happiness and reach the maximum happiness for society, is family, trust others, treat everyone is same.

Ref:

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Wikipedia. 2016. Utilitarianism. [online]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilitarianism [Accessed 15th Feb 16].

Media Law and Ethics – Week 5

In this week, is to read the fourth chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer one question which provided.

What is the ‘Categorical Imperative’?

Categorical Imperative is one of the philosophical concepts mentioned in a book called  Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant, 1785.

there are two type:

Categorical Imperative (unconditional mustand Hypothetical Imperative (conditional must)

If the person did something, without any payment or unconditional, claim as Categorical order. On the other hand, if the person did something to reach, getting pay or any conditional, claim as hypothetical order.

Ref:

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Wikipedia.2016. Categorical imperative. [online]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categorical_imperative [Accessed 8th Feb 16].

Wikipedia.2016. Hypothetical imperative. [online]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_imperative [Accessed 8th Feb 16].

Media Law and Ethics – Week 4

In this week, is to read the third chapter of a book called Ethics in the Virtual World: the Morality and Psychology of Gaming by Garry Young, and answer three questions which provided.

What is ‘sentimentalism’?

Sentimentalism is one of the stage of development of individualism. It is through human’s inner life to personal feeling to judge.

If we find something disgusting is that thing morally wrong?

It depends on the topics and subjects itself. For example, if the person have some visual disease on their skin, in this case, the answer is no. otherwise, if the person didn’t wear any pants and walking on the street, in this case, the answer is yes.

Does engaging in ultra-violent video games degrade one’s ability to show empathy?

The answer is maybe, the person should fully aware that working in ultra-violent video games is a project and is professional job, shouldn’t put personal feeling to the characters itself or treated yourself as game character. On the other hand, if working in ultra-violent video games degrade one’s ability, which mean the person is not capable to handle the project and the person should ask for doctor’s advise ASAP.

Ref:

Garry Young. 2013. Ethics in the Virtual World: The Morality and Psychology of Gaming. Routledge.

Wikipedia. 2016. Moral sense theory. [online]. Available from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_sense_theory [Accessed 1st Feb 16].