Immorality in Video Games

[Exilenomore]

lets make it a fer instance...lets say my wife and child died in a horrible car crash. And you decided to use that event to defend your position on any non important topic like vid games...that would be offensive...but Bringing the historical fact of the Lords suffering to attempt to make a point about a FANTASY person or game is just morally reprehensable...and it doesnt even make the point....so dont go there. You dont have to read this entire thread. You want vid games fine go playem but leave the Lords suffering out of it.

Then you will agree that Exilenomore's arguments are and have been invalid.

there all valid its your methods that validate them

Then you have no problem with my use of the Passion as an example.

Before you answer, keep 2 Timothy 3:16 in mind.

All you did was bring up some ambiguous argument of comparing meditation on the Passion to some immoral recreational passtime. Are you sure that you understand the dangers of this life, seeing that the ancient monks fled to the desert to avoid sin and to grow in their relationship with God? You call me self righteous for pointing out the dangers of this world. Yet, is this not our duty as Christians?

I cannot seriously accept the thought that the holy fathers would have encouraged this kind of recreation.

This was your argument:
"This is the difference, in my opinion. What other reason is there to play a game other than to derive pleasure from it and to relax the mind? I believe it to be objectively sinful to seek this in the imaginative killing of human beings, even if it's not real."

By your logic, reading or participating in the Passion is no better.  By reading or participating you are seeking the imaginative killing of another human being, in this case Jesus Christ, for your own pleasure and to relax your mind.  Don't begin to tell me that you are not relaxing or being pleased by the Passion, due to what happens in it.  Your study and meditation is accomplished for the purpose of believing that you are growing closer to God, thus relaxing your mind that you are not unholy.

I do not see what is so ambiguous about that.  What I do see is that you are so intent on winning an argument that you do not care about being right.  It's as if you have a need to be respected and to demonstrate your superiority over other people at any cost. 

There is a difference between deriving sadistic pleasure from Christ's suffering and thanking God for the fruits of that Sacrifice. If one's meditation is focused on pleasure, then that person is doing it wrong. That is why I do not believe that meditation on Christ's Passion can be compared with 'having fun' by slaughtering imaginative people on a screen.

By the way, if you really think that I have a superiority complex, then feel free to say a prayer for me that I may be humbled. Ktnxbai.

[dark lancer]

lets make it a fer instance...lets say my wife and child died in a horrible car crash. And you decided to use that event to defend your position on any non important topic like vid games...that would be offensive...but Bringing the historical fact of the Lords suffering to attempt to make a point about a FANTASY person or game is just morally reprehensable...and it doesnt even make the point....so dont go there. You dont have to read this entire thread. You want vid games fine go playem but leave the Lords suffering out of it.

Then you will agree that Exilenomore's arguments are and have been invalid.

there all valid its your methods that validate them

Then you have no problem with my use of the Passion as an example.

Before you answer, keep 2 Timothy 3:16 in mind.

All you did was bring up some ambiguous argument of comparing meditation on the Passion to some immoral recreational passtime. Are you sure that you understand the dangers of this life, seeing that the ancient monks fled to the desert to avoid sin and to grow in their relationship with God? You call me self righteous for pointing out the dangers of this world. Yet, is this not our duty as Christians?

I cannot seriously accept the thought that the holy fathers would have encouraged this kind of recreation.

This was your argument:
"This is the difference, in my opinion. What other reason is there to play a game other than to derive pleasure from it and to relax the mind? I believe it to be objectively sinful to seek this in the imaginative killing of human beings, even if it's not real."

By your logic, reading or participating in the Passion is no better.  By reading or participating you are seeking the imaginative killing of another human being, in this case Jesus Christ, for your own pleasure and to relax your mind.  Don't begin to tell me that you are not relaxing or being pleased by the Passion, due to what happens in it.  Your study and meditation is accomplished for the purpose of believing that you are growing closer to God, thus relaxing your mind that you are not unholy.

I do not see what is so ambiguous about that.  What I do see is that you are so intent on winning an argument that you do not care about being right.  It's as if you have a need to be respected and to demonstrate your superiority over other people at any cost. 

There is a difference between deriving sadistic pleasure from Christ's suffering and thanking God for the fruits of that Sacrifice. If one's meditation is focused on pleasure, then that person is doing it wrong. That is why I do not believe that meditation on Christ's Passion can be compared with 'having fun' by slaughtering imaginative people on a screen.

By the way, if you really think that I have a superiority complex, then feel free to say a prayer for me that I may be humbled. Ktnxbai.

See there you go again, taking my words out of context to suit your need to be superior.

[Exilenomore]

All you did was bring up some ambiguous argument of comparing meditation on the Passion to some immoral recreational passtime.

I cannot seriously accept the thought that the holy fathers would have encouraged this kind of recreation.

By "this kind of recreation" and "some immoral recreational pass time" are you including all games which could be called "video games", or just ones which have immoral content?

This thread is about choices made in video games and how they are related to morality. The choice doesn't need to be violent.

No, I am referring only to games that have violent or other immoral content. I am not saying that video games are in itself evil.

That makes sense.

To what extent is violence in video games unacceptable? Would the cartoonish violence of Super Smash Bros. be violent in an unacceptable way? Would the fighting of inhuman alien beings in Halo be immorally violent?

What about Pac-Man. I am unaware of any story to this game, but would that sort of "violence" be unacceptable? It is, after all, just programming, pixels and physics engines doing math. The engine for GTA could very well be altered to have the exact same game in terms which have no correlation to real life. How it is represented on screen is almost never near how it is actually programmed. That is just a dressing on top of the real work. How closely does it have to mimic real life to be immoral?

I would think that the level of immorality should partially be defined by how vivid the images are and on the other hand by the storyline involved. I believe that the problem with playing games about just war is that you're playing it for the satisfaction derived from the killing of pixelated images, rather than the historical value of the story. If someone is genuinely interested in learning about WWII, would he then not rather read books about it instead of playing such a videogame?

[Rosarium]

Well if you choose to fight back in a simulation of D-Day because you think participating in a simulation of Just War is wrong, then you're going to be mowed down by a simulated MG-42.

That isn't the type of choice I was considering. The objective in such a game is to fight back. The choice has to be made in the framework of the game. Some such games do have choices where one can execute a prisoner or something (usually playing a Soviet), but the choice to play the game or not isn't the real point, but a choice made within an artificial environment.

So there's nothing wrong with taking the good guy approach in games depicting Just War or police anti-crime efforts.

Well, as I consider it now, I do not think making "bad" choices in video games have any implicit moral bearing.

So, I do not think there is anything wrong with taking the bad guy or morally ambivalent approach in video games as long as the contents are both not objectively sinful to view and are not sinful because of the person's approach. It is, after all, just a game. When all is done, the pieces are put back on the chess board and we can play again.

[Exilenomore]

lets make it a fer instance...lets say my wife and child died in a horrible car crash. And you decided to use that event to defend your position on any non important topic like vid games...that would be offensive...but Bringing the historical fact of the Lords suffering to attempt to make a point about a FANTASY person or game is just morally reprehensable...and it doesnt even make the point....so dont go there. You dont have to read this entire thread. You want vid games fine go playem but leave the Lords suffering out of it.

Then you will agree that Exilenomore's arguments are and have been invalid.

there all valid its your methods that validate them

Then you have no problem with my use of the Passion as an example.

Before you answer, keep 2 Timothy 3:16 in mind.

All you did was bring up some ambiguous argument of comparing meditation on the Passion to some immoral recreational passtime. Are you sure that you understand the dangers of this life, seeing that the ancient monks fled to the desert to avoid sin and to grow in their relationship with God? You call me self righteous for pointing out the dangers of this world. Yet, is this not our duty as Christians?

I cannot seriously accept the thought that the holy fathers would have encouraged this kind of recreation.

This was your argument:
"This is the difference, in my opinion. What other reason is there to play a game other than to derive pleasure from it and to relax the mind? I believe it to be objectively sinful to seek this in the imaginative killing of human beings, even if it's not real."

By your logic, reading or participating in the Passion is no better.  By reading or participating you are seeking the imaginative killing of another human being, in this case Jesus Christ, for your own pleasure and to relax your mind.  Don't begin to tell me that you are not relaxing or being pleased by the Passion, due to what happens in it.  Your study and meditation is accomplished for the purpose of believing that you are growing closer to God, thus relaxing your mind that you are not unholy.

I do not see what is so ambiguous about that.  What I do see is that you are so intent on winning an argument that you do not care about being right.  It's as if you have a need to be respected and to demonstrate your superiority over other people at any cost. 

There is a difference between deriving sadistic pleasure from Christ's suffering and thanking God for the fruits of that Sacrifice. If one's meditation is focused on pleasure, then that person is doing it wrong. That is why I do not believe that meditation on Christ's Passion can be compared with 'having fun' by slaughtering imaginative people on a screen.

By the way, if you really think that I have a superiority complex, then feel free to say a prayer for me that I may be humbled. Ktnxbai.

See there you go again, taking my words out of context to suit your need to be superior.

I was kind of thinking the same about you...

[Rosarium]

I would think that the level of immorality should partially be defined by how vivid the images are and on the other hand by the storyline involved. I believe that the problem with playing games about just war is that you're playing it for the satisfaction derived from the killing of pixelated images, rather than the historical value of the story. If someone is genuinely interested in learning about WWII, would he then not rather read books about it instead of playing such a videogame?

That is true, if one wanted to learn about WWII, then video games are (usually, maybe there would be some value in some games, but none I've seen so far) inappropriate. Learning is not the goal though; entertainment is.

The satisfaction isn't in "killing" images, but reacting to a complex sensory perception and perhaps the artistic merit of the game's design. If a game is too easy in that one can slaughter with out care, then it is a bad game and few people (none that I know) would play it. The challenge of the game is wanted and the satisfaction of completion and solving problems.

[Exilenomore]

I would think that the level of immorality should partially be defined by how vivid the images are and on the other hand by the storyline involved. I believe that the problem with playing games about just war is that you're playing it for the satisfaction derived from the killing of pixelated images, rather than the historical value of the story. If someone is genuinely interested in learning about WWII, would he then not rather read books about it instead of playing such a videogame?

That is true, if one wanted to learn about WWII, then video games are (usually, maybe there would be some value in some games, but none I've seen so far) inappropriate. Learning is not the goal though; entertainment is.

The satisfaction isn't in "killing" images, but reacting to a complex sensory perception and perhaps the artistic merit of the game's design. If a game is too easy in that one can slaughter with out care, then it is a bad game and few people (none that I know) would play it. The challenge of the game is wanted and the satisfaction of completion and solving problems.

Yet, the repeated generated images of killing and fighting have a certain impact on the psyche. Despite the fact that such statements are widely ridiculed among people, I do believe that that is true.

[Rosarium]

Yet, the repeated generated images of killing and fighting have a certain impact on the psyche. Despite the fact that such statements are widely ridiculed among people, I do believe that that is true.

This actually has a name, The Tetris Effect. This effect can be found in all sorts of activities. I think avoiding such prolonged exposure to stimuli capable of producing this is important for moral reasons, but it isn't applicable to violent video games any more than others.

[dark lancer]

Yet, the repeated generated images of killing and fighting have a certain impact on the psyche. Despite the fact that such statements are widely ridiculed among people, I do believe that that is true.

This actually has a name, The Tetris Effect. This effect can be found in all sorts of activities. I think avoiding such prolonged exposure to stimuli capable of producing this is important for moral reasons, but it isn't applicable to violent video games any more than others.

The Tetris Effect only happens when you play too long in one sitting.  It's not going to make you go out, buy a gun, and massacre people.

[Exilenomore]

Yet, the repeated generated images of killing and fighting have a certain impact on the psyche. Despite the fact that such statements are widely ridiculed among people, I do believe that that is true.

This actually has a name, The Tetris Effect. This effect can be found in all sorts of activities. I think avoiding such prolonged exposure to stimuli capable of producing this is important for moral reasons, but it isn't applicable to violent video games any more than others.

The Tetris Effect only happens when you play too long in one sitting.  It's not going to make you go out, buy a gun, and massacre people.

Yes, but it can have the effect of conjuring up images and thoughts in your mind that should be avoided by Christians.