Ok, here is another way to look at this. Microsoft currently maintains 3 ecosystems for home users, PC phone and console.They own the PC. On the other hand, it does seem like the future does not contain game consoles as the monolithic boxes that we currently enjoy. The phone battle has them in a distant third with no obvious niche. If I were them, I would be trying to get everybody comfortable with the idea of a PC for everything as quickly as possible. If that starts with some kind of weird Xbox-PC hybrid, then so be it.
My only concern is that the PC will become even more of a closed system as a result. That is certainly where Microsoft has been going with Windows 8 and 10.
Is the question in this situation not that by forgoing all your worldy possessions for the benefit of others more needy, you are in fact acting out of self-interest?
I don't think it is, or at least needs to be. When the player is asked to make this decision they aren't told what basis they should use, and even if they were there is no reason that they should listen. If the player decides that this is a moral question, it is also up to them whether or the "self-interest of altruism" is a factor. Plenty of moral theorists over the years would have called this a non-issue.
The philosophical reasoning for altruism seems to me more of a construct to fit religious and or cultural narratives and is perpetrated as an idea that only came to light as a result of the formation of said religion/culture. Whereas my argument would be that if it were not present before, we would not be here to assign a reasoning to it.
I agree (and I have had arguments with people about this) that an authoritative view of morality as provided by religion was useful to societies which lived much closer to death on a daily basis than ours does. However, we see altruism in species which predate ours, suggesting that there is an innate tendency for it (as you say, it has an evolutionary advantage). However, now that we are not dependent on religion for our conceptions of the universe I don't think it would be fair to claim that altruism exists PURELY to suit our cultural narrative. Partially it does, but the vast majority of logical ethical systems contain some circumstances in which altruism is mandated.
Of course, I would say that morality is an abstract notion we hang on to purely as a tool to allow co-operation and doesn't "exist" in any meaningful way. Under that light, if we have a culture in which some altruistic acts are considered correct after a careful reading of the facts, then I believe that those acts are morally correct under that culture. We can use whichever basis we like, so long as the moral system does not self-destruct the people it governs.
To boil it down, I believe that there is modern ethical philosophy with no religious DNA. Even if there isn't, that doesn't matter because ethics are always going to be culturally derived to some extent because they don't exist outside of a culture.
I am surprised that you refer to Milton as a "philosopher." He certainly wrote about philosophical ideas such as free will, but the reference in The Talos Principle seemed like a reference to "Paradise Lost." The plot of the game closely matches the poem.
Well, it comes down to what you want to call a "philosopher". Personally I have a very broad view of the subject which also includes people like George Orwell and Isaac Asimov. I would say that anybody who is dealing with abstract ideas in an active, intelligent and intellectually honest way should be called a philosopher. Some people have more narrow definitions that would exclude all of these writers. I don't think it's really a material issue though, since no matter what you call somebody the value of their words doesn't change.
My girlfriend commented on the similarity with Paradise Lost as well.
I kinda have come to the conclusion that appreciation of art and philosophy and whatnot is definitely easier to take onboard when you're older, probably because you've since seen how both of those manifest in your own experiences.
I tend to agree with you, though one could make the argument that children are closer to philosophy than teenagers and twenty-somethings. They have no preconcieved notions to cloud their judgement or stop them asking questions. However as you have experiences you gain not only preconceptions but also the tools to question them. I certianly feel like I'm more level-headed now than I was at 20, even without the education.
Basically, you need to be shown that enough of your ideas about the world are wrong that you can comfortably question the others as well as those of other people.
@dbos6290: This suggests to me that Talos actually missed the boat on Samsara then. It is deliberately trying to hold you back from ascension and you do deliberately leave it behind.
Thanks for the clarification, and I'm glad that you enjoyed it. I hope to be doing more such analysis as it is relevant.
@oueddy: I agree, that is something I really like about Star Trek as well. A great deal of popular media, especially post Breaking Bad, is about how much people are capable of being dicks. It is nice to have things come along and be hopeful, looking primarily at the positive side of humanity..
It is true that there are many moralities out there for which sacrifice of eternal life, or of independence, for the helping of others in any way is considered the height of goodness. However, consider this: If you were to donate everything that you didn't need to survive to charities which provide food and medicine to people in third world countries, that would seem to be a good thing to do as that money will save many lives whereas it can only contribute to your happiness. Yet nobody does this, even people who we would otherwise call "good". This is because only the most hardcore believers in a pure moral code are willing to discount the need to behave self-interestedly some of the time. In this case your choices are eternal life, freedom and truth, or being locked in a box to ocassionally give people vague hints about laser beam puzzles. The utilitarian will laugh at this for not maximising the good. The Kantian will say that "If it were a universal law that we must make this sacrifice, then everybody would be making the sacrifice and nobody would actually achieve eternal life". Even somebody who recieves their moral guidance from religion rather than philosophy will have to either choose against the messenger ending or accept that many of the other actions they take in real life are morally wrong. If they really behaved like this, they wouldn't have the time or equipment to play video games.
Essentially, such a sacrifice may be noble, but do you believe that makes it "good?" A soldier defending his homeland by charging at a heavily defended bunker may be noble, but would you say that person has "done the right thing?". If not, in what way is the messenger ending different?
Its games like this that don't do the 5 star review system many favors when you consider that X-com 2 and street fighter 5 both got 3 stars also. Yes those games have some problems and issues but on the same footing as this... I don't know.
I get what you are saying, but I think the numbers are serving their purpose. If somebody is just going to look at the score, their question is probably "would I have a good time if I bought this right now". The answer to that question is probably the same in all 3 of those cases. On the other hand, somebody actually reading the reviews is going to see that X-Com will be excellent once they iron out the bugs but that this is inherently adequate. Each audience is getting the information they need.
I used a final (or damned near it) Oculus Rift at the Toronto Auto Show on Thursday. Hugely impressive, but the colour depth and resolution were such that I would stil prefer to use a TV. You can get a really good TV for over 1000 CAD. If I were in the market, the added cost of the HTC would be worth it to me if it meant those issues were resolved.
There are lots of action RPGs but nothing else like Valkyria Chronicles. I find the story and characters of the original much less interesting now that I'm not 17. Therefore, not as interested as I'd like to be.
nintendoeats's comments