Simulated killing Michael Lacewing - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Simulated killing

Michael Lacewingenquiries@alevelphilosophy.co.uk

© Michael LacewingSlide2

Simulated killing

The dramatisation, i.e. enactment, of killing within a fictional context, e.g. in video games, films and plays

Playing the killer

Witnessing a killing

Why worry? It’s ‘just a game’If simulated killing is wrong, obviously it is not for the same reasons that killing is wrongIs any representation morally ok, e.g. rape?What are the real effects of simulated killing?

© Michael LacewingSlide3

Playing the killer

© Michael LacewingSlide4

Utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism: an action is right if it maximises happiness, and wrong if it does not

Could

simulated killing lead to real harm, e.g. an increased risk of killing, aggressive

behaviour, becoming less responsive to distress, approval of violence?This is an empirical claimEvidence: yes, in the short term, though perhaps only in boys or people with violent personalities (Young, Ethics in the Virtual World)

No, in the long term (perhaps, for some people)

© Michael LacewingSlide5

Utilitarianism

Any real harm must be weighed against real pleasure of playing the gameCommon morality: simulated killing is widely considered normal developmentBut is it ‘childish’?

So what?

Lower pleasure?

© Michael LacewingSlide6

Kantian deontology

‘Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law’

‘Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end’

Playing the killer is no violation of one’s duty, but damaging one’s rational will isCould cruel fictional actions encourage real cruelty? The evidence doesn’t support thisCould we fail to develop our moral identity?

© Michael LacewingSlide7

Virtue ethics

Virtues are traits that help us achieve eudaimonia – ‘living well and faring well’We

become just by doing just acts

Killing is often an unjust act

But why think that simulating unjust acts will develop an unjust character?Would a virtuous person engage in simulated killing?What is the right way, the right motive, the right times?

Should we take pleasure from simulated killing? Can we enjoy such pleasures virtuously, e.g. is it within a narrative structure or the point of the game?

© Michael LacewingSlide8

Game and reality

The ‘mean’ is relative to the individualSomeone who cannot keep the game and reality separate should not playEvidence again: perhaps someone who can draw both a conceptual and emotional distinction is not at risk of real psychological effects

© Michael LacewingSlide9

Acting the killer

Actors don’t imitate real-life killings, but pretend to kill according to agreed conventionsActors don’t feel genuine rage (etc), but at most, fictional counterparts

To feel

genuine emotions

would blur the boundary between the character’s psychology and the actor’s© Michael LacewingSlide10

An audience’s perspective

© Michael LacewingSlide11

Make-belief

With fiction, we ‘make-believe’ that what we see is realIs it wrong to make-believe a killing?Killing is sometimes right

What can be wrong with engaging fictionally with a morally right killing?

But what about morally wrong killings?

Utilitarianism: depends on consequences© Michael LacewingSlide12

Morality in fiction

A simulated immoral killing can be presented as immoral, the killer as wretched

Or it can be presented as moral – the morality of the work of fiction disagrees with our own

Is it wrong to imagine that what is immoral is moral?

What does the author intend?We need to be able to keep our ‘moral distance’© Michael Lacewing