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
7 - There are wrongs and then there are wrongs
- 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
Some rapes are worse than others … there, I've said it.
(Hitchens 2011:1)In the previous chapter I considered the view that STAs should be subject to moral scrutiny because of what they represent: their socially significant expression. The relationship between POTAs and STAs is said to be such that even the virtual enactment of an actual taboo carries potent symbolic meaning; it means something in so far as its enactment represents an object and/or event that is of social and/or moral significance outside the gaming realm. For this reason (if for no other), the STA's representative meaning – that is, what it stands for and the message it conveys within the context in which it occurs – warrants moral evaluation. The problem with using socially significant expression as the criterion for selective prohibition, however, is that it is unable to differentiate between those STAs that are presently permitted – as evidenced by the current state of play within video game content – and those that are not (at least within the UK).
In an effort to remedy this predicament, in this chapter I consider an a priori attempt to narrow the focus of the socially significant expression said to be present within certain gameplays. Through the use of fictional video games, I evaluate the move to selectively prohibit content with certain alleged intrinsic properties: namely, those that are said to convey incorrigible social meaning.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Ethics in the Virtual WorldThe Morality and Psychology of Gaming, pp. 75 - 84Publisher: Acumen PublishingPrint publication year: 2013