Violence In Video Games ???

[kisrael]

In reality, when it comes down to it, there really is nothing to keep us "in line" outside of fear. Yes, we have laws and religious beliefs, but all those things stem from fear.

I think this view is too simplistic.

 

I guess you're right that there's nothing to keep us in line, but most people have a moral sense of right and wrong, and have an inate feeling that "do unto others" is a reasonable strategy of coping with life.

 

From an evolutionary standpoint, there's good reason for this: a pack of "cooperaters" are going to do better than a collection of "lone wolfs". So the prehumans that got along, shared food and resources, and learned to trust each other survived and spread their genes (and were able to eventually get to truly impressive tricks, like agriculture and passing of group knowledge) in a way that the prehumans looking for a short term grab-it-if-you-can advantage couldn't.

 

Of course, (and they've done some interesting, if abstract, simulations that have this pattern emerge in a community of virtual people as well) if there's a big community of trusting coopertators, an individual might get a short term advantage by "cheating", not sharing food, murdering a potential competitor but keeping it secret, etc. And there do tend to be cycles, where a trusting community gets enough cheaters that everyone stops trusting each other, but then a small pack of trust emerges again and has an advantage, and then there's a cycle. A lot of cultural things like the law and religous belief help even out this cycle.

[kisrael]

Something just popped into my head regarding violence in games.  If you took a game like GTA3 and changed it so that all of the characters were aliens instead of humans, I doubt there would be so many complaints about it.  It seems it's always OK to kill, maim and hurt aliens.

Here's something GTA:VC has made me think about: games are getting pretty realistic. And to make a better game, you make better AI. The enemies and pedestrians in GTA:VC (not the best example of gaming AI) are probably ant level in intelligence, maybe a bit dumber. But when happens when they put "real" AI in these games?

 

Of course, some people think "real AI" is a long way off, or maybe impossible. But others think that consciousness is an emergent phenomena of a sufficiently advanced system that's aware of its surroundings and its ability to act in those surroundings, and model the world in its head. I mean, with some of today's really advanced AI, especialy that which has learned something and whose experience has made it unique, I'd feel guilty about pulling the plug, even if I knew it wasn't even as sophisticated a brain as that of the chicken I had for lunch. It's not inconceivable that 20 years from now, they'll have the option of putting that level intelligence in a game, creatures that sense and fear their own death....what will it mean to gun 'em down in GTA9?

 

'Course I think the sense of self is really an illusion anyway, so if you could make a perfect clone of a creature, who cares what happens to a single copy. Or maybe AI will be tactically smart, but not in the true awareness sense I hope to see in AI research projects....

 

food for thought tho

[Yar]

...I think this view is too simplistic....

I think Humans are very simple creatures.

 

 

...I guess you're right that there's nothing to keep us in line, but most people have a moral sense of right and wrong, and have an inate feeling that "do unto others" is a reasonable strategy of coping with life...

 

Another snippet from that thing I'm writing, which happens to fit your statement perfectly...

 

"But that's not true!" you say "I believe that we have a sense of right and wrong, so that we can decide what we want to do with our lives!"

Your thinking would be true, but not in the sense you believe. You do not have a sense of "Right and Wrong". Right and Wrong are just two different categories we keep our fears in. Things that are "Right" are things that make us feel good and have positive implications, but only for ourselves. Smoking Marijuana would be "Right" for some people, because it has POSITIVE affects on them (a high), or "Wrong" to some people because of NEGATIVE effects. This would be due to many factors, such as our instinct to reproduce. Drugs, as well as everything besides work and sex, interfere with our main purpose: to reproduce. When people engage in "non-productive" activities, our instincts tell us our goals are not being accomplished.

 

 

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" isn't the mantra of love and caring people make it out to be. People believe and follow this rule not because they want to be nice, loving, caring people-they're just afraid of the " do unto you".

[kisrael]

...I think this view is too simplistic....

I think Humans are very simple creatures.

They are and they aren't. For starters, they're very good at handling contradictions in their lives.

...I guess you're right that there's nothing to keep us in line, but most people have a moral sense of right and wrong, and have an inate feeling that "do unto others" is a reasonable strategy of coping with life...

 

Another snippet from that thing I'm writing, which happens to fit your statement perfectly...

 

"But that's not true!" you say "I believe that we have a sense of right and wrong, so that we can decide what we want to do with our lives!"

Your thinking would be true, but not in the sense you believe. You do not have a sense of "Right and Wrong". Right and Wrong are just two different categories we keep our fears in.

I'd say that those "fears" that compel us are so ingrained, they're no longer really fears in a meaningful sense.

Things that are "Right" are things that make us feel good and have positive implications, but only for ourselves. Smoking Marijuana would be "Right" for some people, because it has POSITIVE affects on them (a high), or "Wrong" to some people because of NEGATIVE effects. This would be due to many factors, such as our instinct to reproduce. Drugs, as well as everything besides work and sex, interfere with our main purpose: to reproduce. When people engage in "non-productive" activities, our instincts tell us our goals are not being accomplished.  

You're forgetting about the desire for immortality I can paint a picture hoping my name will live forever, not just to try and impress chicks.

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" isn't the mantra of love and caring people make it out to be. People believe and follow this rule not because they want to be nice, loving, caring people-they're just afraid of the " do unto you".

They also do it cause they think the world will be better if they do. Maybe they're "afraid" of a world that wasn't full of loving and caring people, but I think that's not fear in a meaningful sense.

[BoOchan!]

Our Government in Australia is almost the strictist in ratings from any video games. GTA3 and Vice City were watered down otherwise our government would refuse them to be sold here. We have no Over 18 rating, if the goverment authorities classifie it adult, the goverment bans the selling of the game. If I had a Son and he wanted to play Games Like Halo, Perfect Dark or any Blood/Gore games, I would limit time from of the game and always make him try and not think about the gore, killing, etc in the game. I wouldn't be highly restrictive, but I would limit it to a small extent. Look, you start kids off from the kiddy games on the 2600, then go up from Console generation to generation