Troubling morals that fiction insists on pushing.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Tue Jun 21, 2011 10:51 pm

The 'screw the world, my girlfriend/sidekick/life is more important!' -- yeah, this isn't a bad plot to have. The problem is that the story wants the protagonist to sacrifice the many to save the few. And I don't just mean selfish anti-heroes; this is a classical heroic trait and seen as a good thing. It's like, what are they trying to say here? What's extra-troubling is that the story seems to recognize the moral bankruptcy of this behavior but then contrive things in a way to make this the right decision; someone else comes up to pull their bacon out of the fire or through a series of unlikely coincidences he gets to have his cake and eat it, too.

Related to this whole 'story abuses the Anthropic principle to push a point, destroys credibility in the process' is the A:TLA ending. It really bugged me. No, not because the Avatar didn't decide to kill Fire Lord Ozai. The problem with it is that it happened in such a way so that Aang was only able to hold onto his principles through a last-minute save or plot contrivance. I know that the message that they were going for is 'hold onto your principles and cherish life no matter what', but doing that completely deflated it on account of the Deus Ex Machina-feeling of it. It has the subtext of 'okay, normally Aang's non-killing wouldn't really work in the real world, but we want a happy ending anyway so screw it'. If they had set up Energybending a bit better it would've been fine, but instead we just have this busted moral that leaves the implication of 'when it comes down to it and you can't count on a convenient DEX, you'll have to kill'.

The other troubling moral lesson is the sour grapes of 'human beings are exactly perfect as they are' in order to piss on transhumanism. It's a scat-covered security blanket our ancestors had to masturbate on in the bad old days when it was pointless and impossible for them to conceive of--let alone work for--a better life, but it's one that's increasingly threatening to make the lives worse of people in the future when it is time for society to cross that threshold. Now while I am totally concerned of a Gattaca-like eugenic dystopia, what people always take away from that is not that income and social inequality is bad, but that transhumanism is bad and we can go back to our shanties and Hoovervilles in peace since it can always get much worse. It's especially infuriating in speculative fiction series like Mass Effect and Tales of Symphonia where critters are existing side-by-side with critters that, frankly, live much better lives than them due to a biological advantage AND there are ways to fix that so it has the additional Bad Moral of 'living 1000 years and being pretty isn't wrong and it's bad to be jealous of other people who get to live that good; living 50 years and being ugly but trying to strive to make your race better is bad'.

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:09 am

Lago PARANOIA wrote:The 'screw the world, my girlfriend/sidekick/life is more important!' -- yeah, this isn't a bad plot to have. The problem is that the story wants the protagonist to sacrifice the many to save the few. And I don't just mean selfish anti-heroes; this is a classical heroic trait and seen as a good thing.

It's always struck me as similar to libertarianism.

Blicero · Post by **Blicero** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:18 am

I know it's fairly beside the point, but that's not totally the case in Mass Effect.

First, the codex thingy mentions how most humans in the ME timeline (particularly military) members have undergone genetic enhancement, such that most diseases have been eliminated, and the average life expectancy is something like 150yrs. Or something like that. And, presumably, a fair number of these advancements have come from interacting with alien tech.

Second, humanity has jumped onto the galactic stage at what is presumably near the apex of the Council race's power. This is why the Reapers are coming back. This has made the Council slow to act and unwilling to embrace change. Given that the first game deals so prominently with humanity becoming more accepted, I don't think it's a far stretch to assume that access to the really hardcore shit the asari or whatever have has been fairly restricted up until this point. (On the other hand, I do find it odd that the supposedly brilliant salarians have not managed to find a way to extend their lifespans beyond 40ish years.)

Finally, the ME universe is still one that's heavily based upon handwavium, and a lot of its inspiration is drawn from fantasy worlds, not other space opera. Bioware's writers have done an admirable job in trying to speculate how space travel and alien races and shit might actually interact with each other, but there are a lot of gaping holes in their vision. Obvious example: why doesn't Shepard have any way of using some "black box" technology to record his encounters with Sovereign that prove beyond a doubt that it was a Reaper? I suspect that races like the asari were thrown in because the writers thought, "hey, everyone loves elves in fantasy settings! Let's make a race of really long lived, pretty people who are inherently adept at magic!" without stopping to consider if other species might try to use the asari's genetic traits to enhance their own lifespans.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:22 am

The best part is that the "black box" technology explicitly exists in ME2 DLC

Maxus · Post by **Maxus** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:22 am

Because being a cold calculating bastard who assesses the various probable outcomes and picks it isn't seen as heroic. That's seen as chilly and creepy.

Comes down to feelings. We are conditioned to treat them like warm glowy clouds of magic goodness and most people can't understand other people who can actually take these magic happy good-clouds and do anything with objectively.

If you tell someone "Just because you feel something, doesn't mean you have to act on it. It's possible you're being selfish, or pissy, or jealous, or something else not good and you need to be able to tell when you are."

And they'll look at you funny.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:41 am

Counter-argument: In real life, I find that most of the time people telling you that you need to be "tough-minded" and overlook the suffering of people you can directly observe, people you know, for the benefit of some big agenda are full of shit. A lot of fiction manages to mangle the message by using it in situations where the protagonist really is the only one who can stop the alien horde from destroying earth, but as a take-home message for real people I think it's fine.

Looking after the people in your life really is almost always a better idea than sacrificing them for the sake of a calculation that might be mistaken anyway.

name_here · Post by **name_here** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:45 am

Actually, in the ME universe, genetic enhancement totally occurs, it's just that people need licenses to do it so as to avoid stuff like cloning a billion rachni (It's not a perfect system). Anyway, since Shepard is a cyborg in the second game, they don't exactly push "transhumanism is bad" very hard.

However, that message is one that gets pushed all too often.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:53 am

Orion wrote:Counter-argument: In real life...

I understand what you mean. But the implications of your argument are that if you have a friend who works for Haliburton you should support the illegal invasion of Iraq and slaughter of it's civilians.

K · Post by K » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:05 am

Transhumanism is often equated with eugenics, and the sins committed in the name of eugenics have been massive, cruel, and ultimately complete failures. Do a quick search on "eugenics America" and you will be shocked, appalled, and ultimately saddened by the waste of human life and the amount of effort spend on someting that was never going to work because of an incomplete understanding of everything from sociology to psychology to biology.

Transhumanism is also equated with elitism which always goes hand in hand with corruption. The classic line of the transhuman has always been "because I am better." That's the line that gets spouted by every corrupt person ever to justify their actions.

As for emotion over logic in moral augments, that comes down the simple fact that emotion is predictable. Logic is not the perfect clockwork machine that people like to believe since it suffers heavily from GarbageIn/GarbageOut Syndrome, but emotion is universal among humans even when the triggers are slightly different.

Lago PARANOIA · Post by **Lago PARANOIA** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:09 am

K: Yes, that is the reason, but it should be the responsibility of writers to show the difference between them rather than pushing human progress back decades. Evolution may have been used to justify social darwinism, but instead of throwing the baby out with the bathwater people should have strived to educate people on what it really means.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:13 am

When transhumanism isn't evil, nobody calls it transhumanism, and nobody complains about it. Prosthetic limbs are not particularly controversial, nor will memory-enhancing chips if and when we develop them.

erik · Post by **erik** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:18 am

There is a great radiolab segment on morality and how the brain struggles between emotional (save the few you see) and rational (save the many that you do not see) arguments ate handled by brains/people. Mebbe when I get home tomorrow I can link that podcast. Anywho it is not that weird that people make irrational decisions based upon emotion. That is how our brains work.

On more movie morals:
I recall an amusing lol image of Harry potter (must try to find tomorrow as well) illustrating a more annoying moral. That his mother's love was enough to save him but nobody else's mother apparently loved them enough (at least in the case of those who die).

Kind of a common trope that doth annoy myself. Much like people making ado over miracles saving a few when everyone else died in some tragic event. Guess those people did not have loving mothers or whateve.

[edit: edited in link to radiolab episode, couldn't find the harry potter gif, but you get the gist.]

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:20 am

Orion wrote:When transhumanism isn't evil, nobody calls it transhumanism, and nobody complains about it.

Whut's the stem cell debate?

Doom · Post by **Doom** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:27 am

PhoneLobster wrote:I understand what you mean. But the implications of your argument are that if you have a friend who works for Haliburton you should support the illegal invasion of Iraq and slaughter of it's civilians.

Exactly, which is why you don't want anything to do with a system where a large percentage of the population works for the military/government, directly or indirectly.

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:29 am

The Stem Cell debate has nothing to do with transhumanism as far as I can tell. A transhumanism scare takes the form: "Evil scientists and liberals want to change us and make us less human." Nobody ever said that stem cell treatments were going to end up stripping us of our humanity.

It's pure fetus worship.

Psychic Robot · Post by **Psychic Robot** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 3:36 am

It's pure fetus worship.

the once and future king

Count Arioch the 28th · Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:23 am

If there was a chance for me to become less human, I would take it in an instant. If I ever lost a limb, I'd request the least subtle prosthetics possible.

On topic, I hated the part of FF8 where that emo Rinoa runs off and almost gets killed, and Squall's friends are berating him for not saving her. Squall replied that there were humndreds of other students that relied on him, and they act like he's some sort of monster. SQUALL IS DOING HIS JOB AS A MILITARY COMMANDER, YOU DUMB BERK!

Orion · Post by **Orion** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:58 am

Meh, I'm not convinced that the Garden desperately needy the tactical guidance of a moody 17 year old. Considering that he's the only vaguely competent person in the entire setting, sending him on the rescue mission was probably the most rational option.

Count Arioch the 28th · Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:01 am

The Grand List of CRPG cliches said it best:

Logan's Run Rule
RPG characters are young. Very young. The average age seems to be 15, unless the character is a decorated and battle-hardened soldier, in which case he might even be as old as 18. Such teenagers often have skills with multiple weapons and magic, years of experience, and never ever worry about their parents telling them to come home from adventuring before bedtime. By contrast, characters more than twenty-two years old will cheerfully refer to themselves as washed-up old fogies and be eager to make room for the younger generation.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:16 am

The 'screw the world, my girlfriend/sidekick/life is more important!'

The audience's feelings towards this one is actually usually inverted or at least conflicted if you make it a few lines in backstory instead of a plot point. If the audience thinks about it from the perspective of the distressed damsel or the protagonist, they think the right choice is the thing that will make their vicarious self personally happy. If they associate with a common citizen of the kingdom, they're suddenly in favor of the greater good. People suck.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 11:49 am

If I lost an arm, I'd want it replaced by something other than an arm. A machine gun would be an obvious choice because of their wide range of day to day applications, but honestly, a megaphone, backscratcher or kettle would work just as well.

That said, a lot of the transhumanists you see in real life tend to be complete fuckwads who seriously want to replace everyone with robots (as in, right now, robot police, and everyone should have engines instead of digestive systems!) It's a shame there isn't as much exposure for the "You know what would be cool? Rewiring the brain to ___/altering your DNA to not go LOLCANCER/replacing lost limbs with better ones" or "One day, we can get all the vehicles to pilot themselves. We should work on making this happen in our lifetimes."

Count Arioch the 28th wrote: and never ever worry about their parents telling them to come home from adventuring before bedtime.

I believe there was one JRPG where precisely that happens, a character getting berated for going off adventuring past her bedtime. A case of Power Word: Middle Name, I suppose.

Darth Rabbitt · Post by **Darth Rabbitt** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 2:36 pm

The Logan's Run Rule is even worse in Pokemon, where the protagonists are expected to start traveling the world at like age 10, and no one thinks there's anything wrong with this.

Chamomile · Post by **Chamomile** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 4:06 pm

Also, Ash Ketchum is no more than fourteen a decade after his tenth birthday.

Maj · Post by **Maj** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:31 pm

Darth Rabbitt wrote:The Logan's Run Rule is even worse in Pokemon, where the protagonists are expected to start traveling the world at like age 10, and no one thinks there's anything wrong with this.

What is wrong with it?

Prak · Post by **Prak** » Wed Jun 22, 2011 10:34 pm

well, to begin with...

The Gaming Den

Troubling morals that fiction insists on pushing.

Troubling morals that fiction insists on pushing.

Re: Troubling morals that fiction insists on pushing.