The Ethics of Virtual Actions: First-Person Shooter Games and the Functional Fuzziness Framework

I. Introduction

Are actions in virtual environments ethically significant? This question becomes particularly relevant in the context of first-person shooter (FPS) games, where players often engage in simulated acts of violence. From the perspective of the Functional Fuzziness Framework (FFF), a philosophical model that emphasizes the emergent and process-based nature of reality, virtual actions are not exempt from moral scrutiny. This essay explores how FFF reframes the ethics of actions in video games, suggesting that even in fictional, digital environments, moral agency and ethical responsibility extend beyond the purely physical world.

II. The Nature of Virtual Reality in FFF

The Functional Fuzziness Framework posits that reality is not a collection of fixed entities but a dynamic, emergent process. According to FFF, all levels of experience—whether physical, mental, or virtual—are interconnected through emergent properties driven by the foundational interplay between Being and Non-Being. Reality is thus inherently "fuzzy," composed of interdependent processes rather than distinct, independent categories.

Within FFF, virtual environments, such as those experienced in video games, are considered emergent domains that arise from the interplay of digital systems, human imagination, and perception. These domains are not isolated from one's broader experience of reality; rather, they are part of the emergent structure that defines an individual's interaction with the world. This interconnectedness implies that actions taken in virtual environments can have ethical significance, as they are part of the broader emergent processes that shape one's moral identity.

III. Video Games as Process Domains

Video games, particularly first-person shooter games, represent a unique type of process domain—one that is digital yet emergent from the same foundational processes that drive other domains of experience. In FPS games, players interact with virtual characters and environments, often engaging in simulated violence such as killing enemies. From an FFF perspective, these actions are not entirely separate from the moral considerations that apply to other domains.

While the virtual characters in FPS games do not possess moral agency in the same way that real individuals or dream representations might, the player's willingness to engage in simulated violence still reflects an aspect of their moral attitudes. Participating in virtual violence without considering the moral implications may undermine the coherence of one's emergent moral identity, much like actions taken in dreams. This is because the actions performed in virtual environments are still part of the individual's broader process of engaging with reality.

IV. Moral Agency in Virtual Domains

In FFF, moral agency is an emergent property of the relationships and interactions within a process domain. In the context of video games, the player is the moral agent whose actions in the virtual domain reflect their engagement with moral values. While the characters in video games are not real people, the act of treating them as disposable can have implications for how the player conceptualizes moral relationships in other domains.

The ethical significance of virtual actions lies not in the direct harm caused—since no physical beings are harmed—but in how these actions align or conflict with the emergent moral fabric of the player's broader reality. If a player treats virtual violence casually, it may influence their moral attitudes in waking life, affecting their empathy and how they relate to others. The boundary between virtual actions and real moral identity is not absolute but fuzzy, and actions in one domain may influence perceptions and behaviors in others.

V. Context and Intention

It is also important to consider the context and intention behind actions in video games. Many players engage in FPS games with the understanding that it is a fictional and consequence-free environment, treating it as a form of entertainment rather than a reflection of real-world values. From an FFF perspective, the ethical significance of virtual actions depends on how the player integrates these actions into their broader moral framework.

If a player perceives their actions in a video game as entirely disconnected from their real-life values, the ethical implications may be less significant. However, if playing such games leads to desensitization to violence or a diminished sense of empathy, it could impact the emergent moral fabric of their lives. The fuzziness between virtual and real experiences means that ethical considerations are not easily dismissed, as actions in one domain can shape attitudes and behaviors in others.

VI. The Impact on Moral Coherence

The interconnected nature of all domains in FFF implies that actions in virtual environments can influence one's moral coherence across different domains of experience. Playing violent video games without considering the ethical implications may contribute to a fragmented moral identity, where actions in one domain are disconnected from values upheld in another. From an FFF perspective, maintaining moral coherence across all domains—whether physical, mental, or virtual—is crucial for an integrated moral identity.

The ethical significance of playing violent video games, therefore, may depend on the extent to which these actions are integrated into the player's broader sense of self and moral coherence. If playing such games negatively influences how one perceives and interacts with real moral agents, it undermines the emergent coherence of their moral identity. Conversely, if players can compartmentalize these actions as purely fictional and unrelated to their real-world values, the impact on moral coherence may be minimized.

VII. Potential Counterarguments

One might argue that video games are purely fictional experiences, disconnected from ethical concerns because they do not involve real people or cause actual harm. However, FFF challenges this view by emphasizing that even virtual domains are part of the broader emergent reality. The way we act in virtual environments reflects our engagement with emergent moral processes, and thus has ethical significance. The moral coherence of an individual is not limited to physical actions but encompasses all domains of experience, including the digital realm of video games.

VIII. Conclusion

From the perspective of the Functional Fuzziness Framework, morality is an emergent feature of the interconnected processes that make up our experience of reality. Virtual environments, as emergent digital domains, are not exempt from moral consideration. Killing virtual characters in a video game, while not causing physical harm, still involves engaging with representations of others and reflects attitudes toward moral agency. In FFF, ethical behavior is about maintaining the coherence of emergent reality, and this includes how we act in digital spaces.

Thus, even in the virtual space of video games, ethical considerations remain significant, as they contribute to or undermine the emergent moral fabric of our lives. The Functional Fuzziness Framework challenges us to rethink the boundaries of moral responsibility, extending ethical reflection to all levels of our experience, whether waking, dreaming, or virtual. By doing so, it underscores the importance of treating all emergent aspects of reality—even those that seem less "real"—with the respect and consideration they deserve.