Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction: playing with right and wrong
- 2 To prohibit or not to prohibit, that is the question
- 3 Hume's strength of feeling
- 4 Kant's call of duty
- 5 The cost and benefit of virtual violence (and other taboos)
- 6 Are meanings virtually the same?
- 7 There are wrongs and then there are wrongs
- 8 Virtual virtues, virtual vices
- 9 Doing what it takes to win
- 10 Agreeing the rules
- 11 Why would anyone want to do that?
- 12 Coping with virtual taboos
- 13 Conclusion
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
4 - Kant's call of duty
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction: playing with right and wrong
- 2 To prohibit or not to prohibit, that is the question
- 3 Hume's strength of feeling
- 4 Kant's call of duty
- 5 The cost and benefit of virtual violence (and other taboos)
- 6 Are meanings virtually the same?
- 7 There are wrongs and then there are wrongs
- 8 Virtual virtues, virtual vices
- 9 Doing what it takes to win
- 10 Agreeing the rules
- 11 Why would anyone want to do that?
- 12 Coping with virtual taboos
- 13 Conclusion
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
[M]orals is not properly the doctrine of how we are to make ourselves happy but of how we are to become worthy of happiness.
(Kant [1788] 1997: 108, original emphasis)In the previous chapter I discussed the role of sentiment within morality, and the extent to which it can be used to selectively prohibit STAs. In this chapter, I consider an opposing view presented by Immanuel Kant: that there is no place for sentiment within moral theorizing, and in fact what one ought to do, at least in a moral sense, should be driven by duty. Kant, therefore, hoped for a society in which persons not only do the right thing, but do the right thing for the right reasons, and so treat each other with respect as autonomous, rational beings (De Marneffe 2001). Having said that, Kant does not confine his moral theory to an ethic of pure intentionality, in which one should be indifferent to the accomplishment of what one intended; nevertheless, he does hold that any consideration, on the part of the subject, as to whether the outcome of one's intention is worthy of the moral effort succeeds only in revealing the subject's immortality (Verweyen 1996).
In this chapter I discuss the work of Kant and those more recent (twenty-first-century) theorists who have sought to apply his moral philosophy to formulations of Kant's categorical imperative can provide the basis for the selective prohibition of video game content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ethics in the Virtual WorldThe Morality and Psychology of Gaming, pp. 37 - 50Publisher: Acumen PublishingPrint publication year: 2013