applied ethics simulated killing

Question 1

what does simulated killing mean?

Answer 1

fictional death. e.g. video games and films.
why its bad/ moral detentions it causes:
- difference between playing killer n watching it in film
-effects simulated killing has on a persons character (e.g. can make more violent)
-simulated killing wrong itself

Question 2

Act utilitarians view of simulated killing

Answer 2

-morally acceptable
-person playing the game gets more pleasure than harm caused to the victim in the game bcos its not real they don’t actually suffer.
result: net gain of happiness.

Question 3

when would rule utiltarains say simulated killing is wrong?

Answer 3

-exposure to killing could make person more likely to kill a real person this pain would outweigh happiness.
+ could make ppl more violent in general.
this case RU would say simulated killing is wrong.

Question 4

Kants deotological ethics in relation to simulated killing

Answer 4

• no major objection to simulated killing.
  -simulated killing doesn’t go against categorical imperative.
• animal cruelty may related here. simulated killing like being cruel to animals may weaken feels of compassion so we have duty to not engage in simulated killing.

Question 5

Aristotle virtue ethics in relation to simulated killing.

Answer 5

remember -key idea of A ethics is virtues r character traits. action centred must act on virtues to make u a good person.

main point -if someone spends a lot of time on video games that involve simulated killing may develop bad habits + bad character.
example: repeatedly killing innocent ppl in game may make someone unkind + unjust.

other hand: A may argue killing fictional ppl isn’t actually unjust or unkind bcus not real ppl so no real injustice. (not unjust act)

consider context: “no one size fits all) virtuous person may partake in simulated killing occasionally as entertainment. in this SK may not be unvirtous. But doing nothing else w ur life except killing ppl in video games bcus u love killing is not virtuous.

Question 6

what is the meta ethics viewpoint with simulated killing?

(moral realism) point

Answer 6

naturalism: “simulated killing is wrong” is true if simulated killing has the natural property of wrongness.

non-naturalism: “simulated killing is wrong” is true if simulated killing has the non-natural property of wrongness

Question 7

what is the meta ethics viewpoint with simulated killing?

(moral anti-realism)

Answer 7

error theory: “simulated killing is wrong” is false bcus the property of wrongness doesn’t exist.

non-cognitivism:
emotivism: “simulated killing is wrong” just means “boo! simulated killing!” + so is no capable of being true or false.

prescriptivism: “simulated killing is wrong” means “don’t do simulated killing!” + so is not capable of being true or false.