Morality of mind control…

[overgeeked]

Is that the test for evil-ness? If people prefer A over B, B is more evil?

I don't think so.

I’m not sure we’re going to solve the nature of evil here. The question is likely as old or older than language itself. There are two broad camps we can look to though. Moral relativism and moral absolutism.

Relativism meaning all morality is relative, it’s subjective and depends on the person, culture, circumstances, etc. We decide for ourselves, basically. Absolutism meaning all morality is absolute, it’s objective and independent of the person, culture, circumstances, etc. We have to look to some authority outside ourselves, which tends to involve religion and tradition, etc.

Most people in the thread seem to be coming at this from a relativist position. Which, in effect, boils down to individual preferences. What’s evil to one is not evil to another. Which has a whole host or problems. But so does the alternative.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I’m not sure we’re going to solve the nature of evil here. The question is likely as old or older than language itself. There are two broad camps we can look to though. Moral relativism and moral absolutism.

Relativism meaning all morality is relative, it’s subjective and depends on the person, culture, circumstances, etc. We decide for ourselves, basically. Absolutism meaning all morality is absolute, it’s objective and independent of the person, culture, circumstances, etc. We have to look to some authority outside ourselves, which tends to involve religion and tradition, etc.

Most people in the thread seem to be coming at this from a relativist position. Which, in effect, boils down to individual preferences. What’s evil to one is not evil to another. Which has a whole host or problems. But so does the alternative.

Of course, religion and tradition are both cultural (possibly multi-cultural, but certainly not *omni-*cultural), and thus relative to other cultures with other religions and traditions. So it's very difficult to truly talk about absolute morality without talking about personal opinion.

 

[TiQuinn]

No need to get personal but you still aren't really making a case. Focusing the question through a lens like Star wars corrupts the discussion by forcing moral absolutism onto the framing. You yourself seem to have recent posts agreeing or admitting that the question needs to be answered in the relative context of any given scenario, pairing that with outrage over Star wars being a terribly corrupting lense of moral absolutism is odd.



If you think the question is one that must be answered in terms of moral absolutism then be clear and say so rather than taking issue with the idea that forcing something with contextual relative morality into moral absolutism corrupts a nuanced discussion with the chains of absolute morality. Dithering like this hedging for both moral absolutism and relative morality presents an incoherent position because the two are antithetical to each other

I don't think the word "corrupting" is at all appropriate for the tone of the discussion, whether that's applied to a person (as you did in your initial post, perhaps without intending or knowing it), or for the overall point. There are multiple viewpoints to be had - saying that something is "corrupting" it automatically dismisses those viewpoints arbitrarily with none of the rigor that you want me to give you.

I've already said my position: From the vantage point of the game, I think it's entirely contextual, and no different than killing an NPC. But I also think this is a very small discussion that does not need to be ratcheted up with a lot of heated rhetoric, which is what I objected to in your post.

 

[The Firebird]

But not untrue, that's one of the longstanding criticisms of starwars as a whole and I'd add that your choice to omit the first half of that sentence mentioning the earlier post along omitting with the very next sentence about its cartoonish morality lends weight to the claim of how star wars is not a useful comparison.

This seems more like the author working through some personal stuff than a criticism of Star wars. Given the strongest examples complicating the "Jedi good, sith bad" dichotomy were put there by Lucas, it seems to me a misreading of the text.

 

[Deset Gled]

So, just to be clear, are you including mundane charisma, fraud, and psychological abuse in your definition of mind control? That’s fine but I don’t think that’s what we’ve mostly been talking about. If nothing else, we mostly have well settled cultural and legal definitions of whether those things are right or wrong (OK, wrong, and wrong, generally).

Yes, my definition of mind control includes those things.

You yourself used real world medical practices as a reference point for multiple posts, and came to the conclusion that intent and consent were the basis of whether something was a poison or a medicine. If the discussion about mind control is based on intent and consent, why does it matter if someone is brainwashed via a magic spell, a sci-fi virtual reality mental assault, or an injection of real chemicals and psychological conditioning? IMNSHO, not only is the discussion the same, but the crossover points are the most important ones to consider because they're the only parts that can be deconstructed with real world moral implications (those "settled cultural and legal" parts you mentioned, although I don't 100% agree about the "settled" bit).

Don't we use terms like marketing propaganda and cult indoctrination for that though? Can you give some specifics if you are talking about something very different from those examples?

Calling things "propaganda" or "indoctrination" isn't really an argument one way or the other. It's just relabeling things, and doesn't mean they aren't just a different version of mind control. I consider them relevant examples.

What type of examples are you looking for? There are many narcotics that could emulate a "Calm Emotions" spell. Basic enchantments like "Sleep" are even easier to replicate with drugs. Deep Brain Stimulation is basically an implementation of mind control that would have been considered pure science fiction just a few decades ago. We're currently using it in experiments most people would call "good" for things like depression and OCD. But the same attempts at this through lobotomies and electro-shock therapy are considered pretty evil today (and it's arguable if/which people at the time were attempting to do good or not).

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Given the strongest examples complicating the "Jedi good, sith bad" dichotomy were put there by Lucas, it seems to me a misreading of the text.

Or, alternately, Lucas is -- by his own admission -- not a deep thinker about scripts and such, and tossed in a bunch of stuff that ends up having a bunch of problematic implications if one thinks about it for longer, which every Star Wars fan but him does.

But "hey, let's talk about issues with Star Wars" is the subject of an already ongoing thread.

 

[Reynard]

Or, alternately, Lucas is -- by his own admission -- not a deep thinker about scripts and such, and tossed in a bunch of stuff that ends up having a bunch of problematic implications if one thinks about it for longer, which every Star Wars fan but him does.

But "hey, let's talk about issues with Star Wars" is the subject of an already ongoing thread.

One of the great things about Star Wars that makes it so accessible is its shallow worldbuilding, including its built in morality.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One of the great things about Star Wars that makes it so accessible is its shallow worldbuilding, including its built in morality.

I'm happier personally with the parts that have deeper worldbuilding and more flexible morality (for stuff outside the Force, which I'm fine with being more built-in). You really need that IMO to have a decent RPG setting, and gamifying fiction is one of my absolute very favorite things in the universe.

 

[Laurefindel]

One of the great things about Star Wars that makes it so accessible is its shallow worldbuilding, including its built in morality.

Yes.

Though I dare say, not shallower in world-building or morality than D&D…

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yes.

Though I dare say, not shallower in world-building or morality than D&D…

What worldbuilding in D&D are you talking about, and in comparison to what? There are a lot of worlds...