Virtual Murders

Virtual Murders

Virtual murders are somewhat objectionable, especially when they articulate some forms of inappropriate engagement in terms of the game, bad sportsmanship, or virtual reality. Virtual murder is wrong because this form of murder can translate into reality with time based on the individual’s perception of murder (Luck, 2009). For instance, when an individual engages in activities that involve actual murder but replicate real-life situations, they tend to translate the virtual actions into reality in the future, which are major vices in society. Although virtual murder may not be perceived as a vice generally since no individual is harmed physically, the actual actions in real life may constitute an actual murder.

There are various costs that Schulzke overlooks in terms of violent video games. Although not majorly mentioned or the concept is not developed, violence yields violence (Schulzke, 2010). Individuals who engage in violent video games tend to have a violet nature hidden in them, and this suggests that they are bound to replicate what they play in the video games at some point. This perspective tends to overlook the practical calculations where individuals assign values to various benefits and harms that result from their actions compared to the advantages and disadvantages that may emanate from similar activities. Although measuring and comparing the values of benefits and costs may be challenging, the end justifies the means in this case.

Moreover, virtual pedophilia is wrong since virtual reality, in most cases, leads to actualization. Playing a video game that encourages pedophilia would lead to individuals committing an act that replicates their virtual environment (Luck, 2009). Accordingly, this is based on the fact that individuals may single out a target audience that they may cause harm to and hence deprive them of their innocence and sense of well-being.

References

Schulzke, M. (2010). Defending the morality of violent video games. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(2), 127-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9222-x

Luck, M. (2009). The gamer’s dilemma: An analysis of the arguments for the moral distinction between virtual murder and virtual pedophilia. Ethics and Information Technology, 11(1), 31-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-008-9168-4

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Virtual Murders

Do you think virtual murder is wrong? If so, why?

Are there any costs or benefits of violent video games that Schulzke overlooks? If so, what are they, and how do they affect his utilitarian calculations?

Do you think that virtual pedophilia is wrong? Why or why not? (And whatever you do, go beyond, “Yuck!”) What logical argument supports your belief?