Jerusalem Post: Mugging Someone In A Virtual World Is Ethical

Really. In Ethics at Work: Virtual ethics, Asher Meir writes:

...In this column I want to focus on one specific aspect of virtual ethics: virtual behaviors that are permitted by the rules (and physics) of the game space, but which simulate activities that are forbidden in RL - for example, the street gangs that reportedly are terrorizing some locations in Second Life. Is it ethical to mug someone in a virtual world?

In my opinion, the answer is yes.

The whole idea of these parallel universes is to enable people to do all kinds of things they fantasize about but don't care or dare to do in RL - mostly things I cannot mention in a family newspaper. Evidently, for many people, this includes joining a street gang or engaging in other kinds of aggressive behavior. Of course there are virtual reality games that are explicitly designed to simulate these behaviors, such as the video game Grand Theft Auto in which the player can take on the role of a criminal, or World of Warcraft, which enables the participant to play a warrior. But that doesn't mean they have no place in a general-purpose virtual world. If these games want to prevent such activities then they can make refraining a condition of participation...

Far be it from me to disagree with the Research Director of the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem, but there are some very interesting assumptions made in that article. For one, 'mugging' is very environment dependent. In some virtual worlds, you can mug or otherwise commit violent acts against others - the virtual world would have to be built with that in it. But some virtual worlds, such as Second Life, do not permit things to happen to an avatar without the user's permission. If you want to entertain me, try to mug me in Second Life. I will giggle at my keyboard. You could shoot me or orbit me - very unoriginal - but then you get an abuse report filed. Why? Because that sort of behavior is not tolerated by the majority of the community. It isn't considered ethical by the community. Therefore, in the context of Second Life, that sort of thing really isn't ethical.

But that isn't really what the author meant, I believe. I believe that the author meant that it is ethical to use a parallel reality to release one's 'dark side', an outlet, an electrical ground.of sorts. I can agree with that, I suppose - as long as it doesn't adversely affect the experience of others. There are plenty of Barbie dolls to rip the appendages off of, just make sure that they are your Barbie dolls.

Adversely affecting the experiences of others in virtual worlds is as ethical as adversely affecting the experiences of others in the real world. Sure, it can be fun if everyone consents (in some virtual worlds, that means simply being there), but if the other person does not consent - using the mugging example - the mugging is as unethical as it would be in real life. That easily extrapolates to any action within a virtual world.

If not, please just hand me all your Lindens dollars and save us all the trouble.