Adapted from "Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy", by David J. Chalmers
https://www.wired.com/story/crime-metave...l-reality/
EXCERPTS: Before there was the metaverse, there were MUDs, or multi-user domains. In 1993, they were the most popular virtual worlds for social interaction. MUDs were text-based worlds with no graphics. [...] A user named Mr. Bungle suddenly deployed a “voodoo doll” ... making users appear to perform actions. Mr. Bungle made one user appear to perform sexual and violent acts toward two others. These users were horrified and felt violated. ... eventually a “wizard” eliminated Mr. Bungle from the MUD.
Almost everyone agreed that Mr. Bungle had done something wrong. [...] The victim’s experience lends support to virtual realism—the view that virtual reality is genuine reality, and that what happens in virtual worlds can be as meaningful as what happens in the physical world. The assault in the MUD was no mere fictional event from which the user has distance. It was a real virtual assault that really happened to the victim.
Was Mr. Bungle’s assault as bad as a corresponding sexual assault in the nonvirtual world? Perhaps not. If users in a MUD attach less importance to their virtual bodies than to their nonvirtual bodies, then the harm is correspondingly less. Still, as our relationships with our virtual bodies develop, the issue becomes more complex. In a long-term virtual world with an avatar in which one has been embodied for years, we may identify with our virtual bodies much more than in a short-term textual environment. The Australian philosopher Jessica Wolfendale has argued that this “avatar attachment” is morally significant. As the experience of our virtual bodies grows richer still, violations of our virtual bodies may at some point become as serious as violations of our physical bodies.
The Mr. Bungle case also raises important issues about the governance of virtual worlds. [...] All this raises crucial issues about the ethics of near-term virtual worlds. How should users act in a virtual world? What’s the difference between right and wrong in such a space? And what does justice look like in these societies?
Let’s start with virtual worlds that exist already...
[...] This presents a philosophical puzzle. What is the relevant moral difference between virtual murder and virtual pedophilia? Neither act involves directly harming other people. If virtual pedophilia led to nonvirtual pedophilia, that would be a major harm, but it seems that the evidence for such transfer is weak. It is not straightforward for moral theories to explain what is wrong here...
[...] In many multiplayer game worlds, there are “griefers”—bad-faith players who delight in harassing other players, stealing their possessions, and harming or even killing them within the game world. This behavior is widely regarded as wrong insofar as it interferes with other users’ enjoyment of the game. But is stealing someone’s possessions in a game as wrong as doing so in real life?
[...] Virtual theft is hard to explain if virtual objects are mere fictions. How can you “steal” an object that doesn’t exist? The philosophers Nathan Wildman and Neil McDonnell have called this the puzzle of virtual theft...
[...] What about murder in virtual worlds? Because there’s no genuine death in near-term virtual worlds, there is not much room for genuine murder... Killing an avatar might be more akin to murder followed by reincarnation, at least if reincarnation produces full-grown people with memories intact. It might also be akin to destroying a persona: perhaps eliminating the Iron Man persona while Tony Stark still lives. Those are all morally serious actions, even if they’re not as serious as murder in the ordinary world...
[...] How should wrong actions in virtual worlds be punished? Banishment is an option, but it may not count for much...
[...] Our moral and legal systems will need to catch up. We often treat virtual worlds as escapist game environments where our actions don’t really matter. But in the coming decades, virtual worlds will move far beyond games to become part of our everyday lives...(MORE - missing details)
RELATED: Virtual Reality: Ethical Challenges and Dangers ...... Cyberethics
https://www.wired.com/story/crime-metave...l-reality/
EXCERPTS: Before there was the metaverse, there were MUDs, or multi-user domains. In 1993, they were the most popular virtual worlds for social interaction. MUDs were text-based worlds with no graphics. [...] A user named Mr. Bungle suddenly deployed a “voodoo doll” ... making users appear to perform actions. Mr. Bungle made one user appear to perform sexual and violent acts toward two others. These users were horrified and felt violated. ... eventually a “wizard” eliminated Mr. Bungle from the MUD.
Almost everyone agreed that Mr. Bungle had done something wrong. [...] The victim’s experience lends support to virtual realism—the view that virtual reality is genuine reality, and that what happens in virtual worlds can be as meaningful as what happens in the physical world. The assault in the MUD was no mere fictional event from which the user has distance. It was a real virtual assault that really happened to the victim.
Was Mr. Bungle’s assault as bad as a corresponding sexual assault in the nonvirtual world? Perhaps not. If users in a MUD attach less importance to their virtual bodies than to their nonvirtual bodies, then the harm is correspondingly less. Still, as our relationships with our virtual bodies develop, the issue becomes more complex. In a long-term virtual world with an avatar in which one has been embodied for years, we may identify with our virtual bodies much more than in a short-term textual environment. The Australian philosopher Jessica Wolfendale has argued that this “avatar attachment” is morally significant. As the experience of our virtual bodies grows richer still, violations of our virtual bodies may at some point become as serious as violations of our physical bodies.
The Mr. Bungle case also raises important issues about the governance of virtual worlds. [...] All this raises crucial issues about the ethics of near-term virtual worlds. How should users act in a virtual world? What’s the difference between right and wrong in such a space? And what does justice look like in these societies?
Let’s start with virtual worlds that exist already...
[...] This presents a philosophical puzzle. What is the relevant moral difference between virtual murder and virtual pedophilia? Neither act involves directly harming other people. If virtual pedophilia led to nonvirtual pedophilia, that would be a major harm, but it seems that the evidence for such transfer is weak. It is not straightforward for moral theories to explain what is wrong here...
[...] In many multiplayer game worlds, there are “griefers”—bad-faith players who delight in harassing other players, stealing their possessions, and harming or even killing them within the game world. This behavior is widely regarded as wrong insofar as it interferes with other users’ enjoyment of the game. But is stealing someone’s possessions in a game as wrong as doing so in real life?
[...] Virtual theft is hard to explain if virtual objects are mere fictions. How can you “steal” an object that doesn’t exist? The philosophers Nathan Wildman and Neil McDonnell have called this the puzzle of virtual theft...
[...] What about murder in virtual worlds? Because there’s no genuine death in near-term virtual worlds, there is not much room for genuine murder... Killing an avatar might be more akin to murder followed by reincarnation, at least if reincarnation produces full-grown people with memories intact. It might also be akin to destroying a persona: perhaps eliminating the Iron Man persona while Tony Stark still lives. Those are all morally serious actions, even if they’re not as serious as murder in the ordinary world...
[...] How should wrong actions in virtual worlds be punished? Banishment is an option, but it may not count for much...
[...] Our moral and legal systems will need to catch up. We often treat virtual worlds as escapist game environments where our actions don’t really matter. But in the coming decades, virtual worlds will move far beyond games to become part of our everyday lives...(MORE - missing details)
RELATED: Virtual Reality: Ethical Challenges and Dangers ...... Cyberethics