Descripciones mejoradas de Syndetics:

Ethics in the Virtual World examines the gamer's enactment of taboo activities in the context of both traditional and contemporary philosophical approaches to morality. The book argues that it is more productive to consider what individuals are able to cope with psychologically than to determine whether a virtual act or representation is necessarily good or bad. The book raises pertinent questions about one of the most rapidly expanding leisure pursuits in western culture: should virtual enactments warrant moral interest? Should there be a limit to what can be enacted or represented within these games? Or, is it all just a game?

Tabla de contenidos provista por Syndetics

• Abbreviations(p. v)
• 1 Introduction: playing with right and wrong(p. 1)
• 2 To prohibit or not to prohibit, that is the question(p. 15)
• 3 Hume's strength of feeling(p. 25)
• 4 Kant's call of duty(p. 37)
• 5 The cost and benefit of virtual violence (and other taboos)(p. 51)
• 6 Are meanings virtually the same?(p. 65)
• 7 There are wrongs and then there are wrongs(p. 75)
• 8 Virtual virtues, virtual vices(p. 85)
• 9 Doing what it takes to win(p. 99)
• 10 Agreeing the rules(p. 115)
• 11 Why would anyone want to do that?(p. 127)
• 12 Coping with virtual taboos(p. 139)
• 13 Conclusion(p. 155)
• Notes(p. 159)
• Bibliography(p. 167)
• Index(p. 181)

Reseñas proporcionadas por Syndetics

CHOICE Review

In June 2011, the US Supreme Court considered a California law banning the sale of violent videogames to children. The ban was judged to be illegal on the grounds that videogames are protected as free speech by the First Amendment. The Court paid no attention to arguments about morality or immorality of violent videogames. In this slender volume, Young (Nottingham Trent Univ., UK) succinctly reviews the moral grounds for the state to ban hyperviolent videogames. Short chapters scrutinize the relevance of game play for various philosophers: David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill, Aristotle, and others. Moral systems may provide an adequate basis for evaluating behaviors in real life, but none, the author argues, provide a basis for judging any behaviors, no matter how offensive, in virtual worlds. Alternatively, Young looks to evidence of the psychological damage done to gamers by engaging in despicable virtual acts as offering a better basis for banning viciously violent videogames from the market. Unfortunately, this reviewer is doubtful that his arguments are strong enough to convince the Supreme Court justices that they were mistaken in their judgment. Summing Up: Recommended. Upper-division undergraduate, graduate, and research collections. A. J. Wharton Duke University

Notas de autor provistas por Syndetics

Garry Young is a Senior Lecturer in Psychology in the School of Social Sciences at Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham. He is co-author of Transcending Taboos: A Moral and Psychological Examination of Cyberspace and author of Delusional Misidentification.