Thread: Dream ethics

Originally posted by kage23
Hi, I'm new to the forum and while I've heard about LD in the past, it's only recently that I've been serious about it. So far, no luck. I have always had bad dream recall, and I have only been keeping a dream journal for a few days (only one entry so far, a very brief image remembered from the night before).

Anyway, that's not what this post is about. I'm curious to see what people think about ethics and morality in dreams. It seems to me that, since a dream is only in your head and not real, that ethics and morality don't really matter. Does everybody agree with this? Basically, I wonder what people think about doing things in dreams that you would not do in real life. For example, robbing a bank, sleeping with girlfriend's best friend, committing senseless murders, etc. Obviously, in real life, these things would all be wrong. If it's in a dream, does that make it okay? Are there any things that are right or wrong to do in dreams? Or is the dreamworld totally amoral?

I'm a student of philosophy, so I am interested in these kinds of things. I'm just curious to see how everybody else feels on this matter.

So, you are a Philosopy Student and suppose that it is entirely permissible to harm and exploit Ideal People because you do not suppose that they exist in your waking Material World. One would think that a Philosophy Student might consider whether any of the Attributes of Reality can be applied to Subjective Experience. At a certain Level of Consciousness, Dream Characters are experienced, are perceived, and they are effected by the actions of a Dream. When you cut them, do they not bleed?

So, I honestly do not regard you as much of a Philosophy student. Any real Philosophy student would have thought of these possiblities. You stopped your thinking short in order to give yourself licence to run what you think is a personal and private video game orgy and hell of violence in your head, excusing yourself by insisting that Morality does not apply when one only imagines being cruel and predatory.

But we know what kind of person you are, don't we?

Originally posted by PhowaBoy


I would say that actions which are spawned from anger or hatred could be labeled immoral, as the purpose of the action is to cause harm. *If one were killing to truly prevent harm to the victim and to others, then the action is based in compassion. *However, the wisdom required to know when to do this is most likely beyond anyone who isn't omniscient.

I believe actions that spawn from anger should be ENCOURAGED during a dream. It's better to vent them in a harmless environment than to bottle them up and wait for them to explode on wives/children/employees etc.

There are NO RULES OF ETHICS OR MORALITY. Morals are what you make them to be. I tend to believe that most things are what you make them.

I voted 'no' I see dreams as a way to let my mind 'sort things out', lucid or not, an example would be the feeling of rage. If I am mad at someoneor thing I strongly prefer to let my mind wander in my dreams, to get over the emotion. If I didn't I'd be quite likely to act in real life, and I realy don't want to do that.

Originally posted by Leo Volont

So, I honestly do not regard you as much of a Philosophy student. Any real Philosophy student would have thought of these possiblities. You stopped your thinking short in order to give yourself licence to run what you think is a personal and private video game orgy and hell of violence in your head, excusing yourself by insisting that Morality does not apply when one only imagines being cruel and predatory.

But we know what kind of person you are, don't we?

There's lots of people here who can say they disagree without making personal attacks. Why do you insist on implying anyone who doesn't agree with you is a wicked person? And you're not honestly trying to change people anyway, you know as good as I do that you're just driving people to disagree with you more. Quit your taunting and do something constructive instead of tearing other people down, allright? Now that that's been said...

Hello fellow philosophy student! Nice choice of study.
I think the matter is (at least somewhat) subjective. Indeed, certain immoral actions within dreams can cause a loss of integrity and character, but what these actions are at least a little dependant on the person performing them, and not universally applicable. For instance, there are people here who feel a dream world is something that is in your head, that you create and control. To these people, killing DC's in a dream might not be anything more then acting out the role of Brutus in a Julius Ceasar play. The (imaginary) Brutus (imaginarily) kills the (imaginary) Julius Ceasar. Though ofcourse, this depends on how close to home you hit it. If you were, in your dream, be playing Rambo, you'd build up a wall between your own self and your actions at that point in time. You're not really doing that as yourself, but as the character Rambo. Also, the opponents you face as Rambo will likely be faceless grunts, further distancing the act of killing from a person's identity. Conversely, if you are yourself in your dream, and would kill a close friend of yours, how would you feel? Probably at least a little shocked that you we're capable of doing such a thing, even in an imaginary world.
So, the question to ask is, how much does a person feel their interacting with a dream on a personal level, and not on a purely imaginary level? There have been dozens of movies that involve heroes killing lots of people to ultimately stop the bad guy. Computer games have put the previously passive role of the viewer into an actual participant of these events, and still mostly people don't feel bad about killing in games at all. Not only the amount of perceived realism in dreams determines whether or not real world morals should apply to dreams, it depends on whether one can temporarily switch off one's own identity, thus making you not responsible for your deeds at the time.
Here's an example. I have a lot of stored anger at times, and my way to release that anger is listen to some loud music and imagining myself beating up people. In these imaginations I've done some horrid things, such as killing people in gruesome ways. However, I don't think this concerns my real self. Although it is always me in my imaginations, performing these actions, this is only my way to release stored anger, not something I'd want to do in real life. Thus, I am not fully responsible for my deeds at that time.
Yet, I am not capable of turning off my identity completely. For example, in Knights of the Old Republic, I found myself unable to play Dark Side, even though I was acting out a character and interacted with other imaginary characters. I found I couldn't resist helping the people in need, and I couldn't indiscriminatly kill people who were asking for my help. So there are boundaries to where things imaginary, start affecting your real self. These vary from person to person, and I've met a lot of people who look at me strangely when I said I never completed the game with the Dark Side just because I couldn't.

But, the question is not how far one can go, but how far one should go. The law provides an awnser to this question. If you are agreed to have suffered from temporary insanity at the time you commited a crime, you are considered to have been another person at the time of the crime, and therefore cannot be convicted of it. But, someone cannot kill a person and claim that that was simply his way of releasing stored anger, and that he let his identity go at that time, so he wasn't the one responsible. Where do you draw that line, then? To be honest, I don't know. One is inclined to say to trust your feelings on this matter, and that's a sound advice for anyone. Yet, with ethics being one of the (if not the) most practical disciplines of philosophy, it's not satisfying not to come to a conclusion here. Therefore, I will still attempt to draw this line, but the conclusion will not be indisputable. Though I am hardly worried about this, few people (if anyone) ever come to indisputable conclusions in the field of ethics. The line I draw is at the point of consistency of the object of your immoral act.

--------------------------------------------------------------

The most convincing proof that I can find that for example, killing in dreams is ethically sound, is that next dream, the very same DC can be up and about running through a flowery field bathed in sunlight. In fact, it can even happen the same dream the DC was killed. And, stabbing a DC in a dream may not kill them at all, no matter how many times you do it. Actions in dream simply don't always have the same results, and therefore it is useless to call any action in a dream morally unsound, because the results of that action are unknown. That brings us to the question if there are immoral results in dreams, then. But the results of actions are actions themselves, because they also produce results in a similar fashion. And if you think about it, it makes sense. Consider this: A ball rolls and hits a second ball, which then starts to roll. The first ball hitting the second ball is the action, the second ball starting to roll is the result. But if that second ball hits a third ball, then the result has produced another result, and it must therefore also be an action. And since we've just concluded that actions cannot be immoral in a dream, the results, which are also actions, cannot carry moral value either. This means that none of your actions, or the results thereof, can carry moral value in dreams, since their consequences can literally be anything, as opposed to the real world, where a specific action always leads to one specific result.

There's one important aspect that isn't included in that analysis, though. Even though the actions might not be immoral, you may still feel bad doing them due to what I've talked of earlier, the inability to fully switch off your identity. If that's the case, then just don't do it. There might not be any ethical or philosophical grounds for you feeling bad about that, but what good is that going to do you when you're thrown into uncertainty because you've killed a DC in your dream? Those are your personal boundaries, and crossing them will not do you any good.

So, to conclude: No actions you take in dreams are inherently immoral, but there are some boundaries that vary from person to person, that you shouldn't cross, because you risk losing integrity and in extreme cases, identity if you do. The bottom line is that if you personally feel you shouldn't do something in a dream, it is unwise to proceed because it may harm you on a personal level, but there are no ethical boundaries in dreams other than the ones you set for yourself.

[b]NOTE: I commend anyone who has actually read this entire post. For the people who are too lazy to read it all (which I totally sympathize with), read from the red line

Originally posted by Alucinor Architecton
There are NO RULES OF ETHICS OR MORALITY. Morals are what you make them to be. I tend to believe that most things are what you make them.

No one said anything about "rules of ethics". Ethics, morals, ideals and principles are of course their own for every being but the question here remains the same. Just as the thought stated in my signature notes and I agree: I wouldn't want to give up my ego (ideals and principles being a huge part of it) for complete objectivity.

[quote]--------------------------------------------------------------

The most convincing proof that I can find that for example, killing in dreams is ethically sound, is that next dream, the very same DC can be up and about running through a flowery field bathed in sunlight. In fact, it can even happen the same dream the DC was killed. And, stabbing a DC in a dream may not kill them at all, no matter how many times you do it. Actions in dream simply don't always have the same results, and therefore it is useless to call any action in a dream morally unsound, because the results of that action are unknown. That brings us to the question if there are immoral results in dreams, then. But the results of actions are actions themselves, because they also produce results in a similar fashion. And if you think about it, it makes sense. Consider this: A ball rolls and hits a second ball, which then starts to roll. The first ball hitting the second ball is the action, the second ball starting to roll is the result. But if that second ball hits a third ball, then the result has produced another result, and it must therefore also be an action. And since we've just concluded that actions cannot be immoral in a dream, the results, which are also actions, cannot carry moral value either. This means that none of your actions, or the results thereof, can carry moral value in dreams, since their consequences can literally be anything, as opposed to the real world, where a specific action always leads to one specific result.

There's one important aspect that isn't included in that analysis, though. Even though the actions might not be immoral, you may still feel bad doing them due to what I've talked of earlier, the inability to fully switch off your identity. If that's the case, then just don't do it. There might not be any ethical or philosophical grounds for you feeling bad about that, but what good is that going to do you when you're thrown into uncertainty because you've killed a DC in your dream? Those are your personal boundaries, and crossing them will not do you any good.

So, to conclude: No actions you take in dreams are inherently immoral, but there are some boundaries that vary from person to person, that you shouldn't cross, because you risk losing integrity and in extreme cases, identity if you do. The bottom line is that if you personally feel you shouldn't do something in a dream, it is unwise to proceed because it may harm you on a personal level, but there are no ethical boundaries in dreams other than the ones you set for yourself.

[b]NOTE: I commend anyone who has actually read this entire post. For the people who are too lazy to read it all (which I totally sympathize with), read from the red line

Ow...Ow...Ow...

Right, I think I get your point. Its a matter of personal boundries, if I for example couldn't stab someone in my waking life then doing so in a dream can be considered immoral because I would consider it immoral outside of a dream, Correct?

---------------------

Now, When you compare dreams to games you compare the settings are artificial and thus has no consequence upon reality. Whilst this is true there is a large gap between games and dreaming. A game has set parameters and objectives, goals that you must achieve and limits by which you must attain them. When playing a game you cannot under any circumstances bypass these rules so therefore whatever you do is not breaking any rules and so there are no holds, bars or limits on what you can do. Under these limitations you strive towards a set goal, and and sidequests that may have been implemented. The limits and goals are set by a person other than yourself, so rather than playing in your own reality you are abiding by the rules and settings of an other person.

when you dream, there are no limits or goals to achieve. A game will be the same no matter how many times you play it, but a dream is constantly shifting to whatever form you wish it to be. A persons abilities in a dream are limitless from any one persons perspective, there are no limits or parameters to abide by. A person cannot imagine something they are incapable of doing in a dream for once they learn of something new they are instantly capable of performing that action whilst dreaming, thus there is nothing a person cannot do whilst dreaming. A person can choose not to do certain things while in a dream setting, such as playing a shoot em up game and deciding to attempt to complete a level using only one type of gun. This is a personal boundry, not a limit specified by the game and breaking it is still conforming to the rules. A dreaming person may choose not to fly while dreaming but it is still possible, so it is not a rule or a limit but merely a boundry set by themselves in the enviroment.

With this speculation it is not possible to compare a dream to a game, for a game is playing by anothers rules with limits that are not breakable whilst a dream has no limits or goals to achieve and is always shifting to the dreamers desires.

-----

Morals therefore can apply to both dreams and games. A person may play a game and set himself not to kill an innocent person, because he feels that it would be wrong. Whilst allowed by the rules of the game a person may apply this boundry because of his own feelings towards the matter. A person may believe that thier morals are what gives them thier identity and so without them the would not be themselves. In a dream, as there are no rules to conform to, people may choose to apply any morals he or she may have to have to have a structure of rules, or may simply apply the morals because it is thier identity and so they must uphold them no matter the situation.. The question of whether morals and ethics should be applied to dreams is therefore debatable in that each person has different morals and ethics. the fact that a dream is an artificial enviroment also applies, as a person with many morals feels they need not apply as there is no bad consequence to thier actions. So while a person has morals to prevent bad consequences in thier waking life, they need not apply to a dream world because these consequences wouldn't happen.

Keeping this in mind, it may then be possible for a person to attempt to witness what would happen should they do something thier morals would not allow. A person who would not steal may create a replica enviroment of thier waking life to simulate what may happen if they did. This may not be a very accurate replication of what would happen but it would reinforce a persons morals on the subject as they would witness at the very least what they believe would happen. As it is an artificial enviroment it would be possible ot test situations without morals which may be what people who do not apply morals to dreams are trying to achieve. Therefore a person may not apply morals to dreams remind that person why they have those morals.

So in conclusion the application of morals and ethics is largely a personal matter, Whether they apply morals because they believe it is thier identity or whether they dont apply morals because their is no consequence to thier actions. Those who feel that morals should be applied are not effecting those who dont apply such morals, and niether are those without morals are not affecting those with them.

The upper part of this post is directed towards Jalexxi, the middle is an unneccisary part of my arguement and the last segment is the main point I was trying to make. I have no idea how I managed to say so much on the subject but as Jalexxi did with his, I commend anyone who had the patience to read all that I had to say, though I doubt I managed to write as much as he did.

~Lil~

Originally posted by Lilmikee+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Lilmikee)</div>

Right, I think I get your point. Its a matter of personal boundries, if I for example couldn't stab someone in my waking life then doing so in a dream can be considered immoral because I would consider it immoral outside of a dream, Correct?[/b]

Yes, it can be considered immoral by a person, but it would not be immoral. Dreams hold no moral value, because anything can happen in reaction to any action. I can stab a DC in my dream, and he might genuinly thank me for it with his dying breath and say I just made his day. Morals like 'Thou shalt not kill' are flawed in dreams, because they simply do not have to have the same consequences as in the real world.
But, it is true that there are boundaries that people set for themselves, lines they cannot cross or they would feel they'd lost their integrity. These are lines that vary from person to person, and should not be crossed, because it will hurt yourself. But it is important to note that these are not universal ethical values. To go back to your example, if you couldn't stab someone in real life, you might consider this to be an immoral thing to do within a dream. That means YOU should not perform that action, because you'd feel disthraught after you had done it. But it is not an ethical law, and someone who doesn't feel stabbing in dreams is bad, is not doing anything unethical.
That's a purely practical point: Don't go do stuff you'd feel bad about doing just because there are no morals in dream. You'll only hurt yourself.

<!--QuoteBegin-Lilmikee
So in conclusion the application of morals and ethics is largely a personal matter, Whether they apply morals because they believe it is thier identity or whether they dont apply morals because their is no consequence to thier actions. Those who feel that morals should be applied are not effecting those who dont apply such morals, and niether are those without morals are not affecting those with them.

I agree with your conclusion, though I am inclined to say nobody can be without morals completely. But indeed, how many of these morals there are, and where they are applied, is a purely subjective matter.

excellent ideas, jalexxi and lilmikee. i hadn't considered the idea of distancing yourself from your own identity, i.e. killing faceless grunts as Rambo. i completely know what you mean about being violent in your imagination when you're angry. i think this is a very healthy way to release anger, etc. and i had a similar kind of thing with KOTOR. although i did finish the game as Dark Side, i found it very difficult to be rude to NPCs, and to not help them. it just felt wrong.

as for your discussion of actions, results, and consequences. you have shown in general that dream-actions are not inherently ethical or unethical, but what about specific cases? in real life, we can usually know what the result of an action will be, and thus tell whether the action would be ethical or not. and your argument showed that we can't apply this to dream-actions, because the result is unpredictable. but shouldn't this suggest that we should be extra-cautious about our dream-actions? since the results are unpredictable, we don't know if our action will cause any immoral results or not.

of course, all this depends on our defitions of ethical and moral behavior. are actions moral or immoral based solely on the results of those actions? i tend to think that some actions are moral or immoral regardless of the consequences. for example, torturing a puppy. this is an immoral act, regardless of results. of course, even inherently immoral acts can be justified if they will prevent more immoral acts. let's say that an evil dictator has taken over the world and will kill ten people for every minute that i spend not torturing a puppy. obviously, torturing the puppy is still immoral, but it will prevent greater immorality, and can thus be justified. on the other hand, consider imagining torturing a puppy. there is absolutely nothing immoral about exercising your imagination. if i decide to go on a DC-killing spree, i'm not actually killing anyone; i'm simply imagining killing people, so no immoral acts were committed. anything that happens in a dream happens in your imagination, and is excused from rules of morality. of course, you are correct in that you might still feel bad about it. this goes back to the whole idea that some actions will damage your character whether they are immoral or not, whether you commit them in the real world or the dream world. so while you still shouldn't do anything that you will feel bad about afterwards, that doesn't mean that such actions are immoral.

lilmikee, sorry, i can't spend as much time addressing you as i did with jalexxi, but i like your ideas about the differences between a game and a dream. perhaps a better analogy would be (this is for all the star trek fans that i know are out there) that a dream is like a holodeck. no boundaries but your own imagination, and no direct consequences to the accepted "real world." still, i think that all the arguments based on a dream resembling a videogame are just as workable as arguments based on a dream resembling a holodeck.

Rape is fun if actually everyone is happy with it. Since there is just one person, you, raping would be fun. However don't mistake RL for a dream lol.

I voted yes, but I'm referring to normative ethics.

That is, ethical study done in the spirit of promoting happiness and other things that are good for their own sake. In other words, studying what "ends" are to be accomplished, for the purposes of enjoying their accomplishment. Odd, though, that normative ethics aren't really socially "normal."

Most of what people think of ethics is "descriptive ethics," which is just what everyone already thinks is right and wrong. In that sense, NO, absolutely NO. I do not want that in my dreamworld.

Throw descriptive ethics out.

Dreams are for revolutions.

I voted sometimes, I mean I don't think I would kill my mom in a dream or anything like that, but on the other hand I would rob a bank or kill random dream character. There are only a few things that I wouldn't do in a dream due to morals, but it's a dream and you should be able to have fun by breaking the "rules".

Just a thought

i think there is something to karma, which most simply states that every conscious action has a reaction.

i don't think god will see what i do in my dreams and judge me. but i do think if somebody finds satisfaction in raping, killing, or inflicting pain on DC's, they are only feeding a state of mind which finds pleasure in those things.

"as a man thinketh, so he becomes'

Originally posted by Asher
\"as a man thinketh, so he becomes'

No. I just thought of an apple but I didn't become an apple.

Good question.

I find that whatever actions I commit in a dream have a great impact on me emotionally. I simply couldn't bring myself to cause anyone that much harm in a dream.

A persons morality and ethics make up who they are. If you are killing people and raping women in dreams that's a reflection on you as a person. If you don't do it in real life is that because you think the consequences are too great? You'll go to jail etc? That really says your ethics aren't based on compassion for others. It just says you are smart, have logic and know how to make things work in your favour. When there are no consequences you act as you please...

Just because there aren't consequences doesn't make an act okay.

Someone who is healthy in mind won't commit these acts in a dream because they will feel no need to. So if you are really angry in your dreams perhaps there are issues you aren't addressing in the real world. I believe it is much better to work through these things in waking life than to suppress the emotion. Suppressed emotions will eventually find their way into the real world.

That said, I don't see the problem with stealing cars in dreams. Law against theft is a human law constructed to maintain order and this doesn't apply in a dream. However our emotions are very much intact and although dream crimes won't affect anyone real they affect you.

Originally posted by Asher+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Asher)</div>

but i do think if somebody finds satisfaction in raping, killing, or inflicting pain on DC's, they are only feeding a state of mind which finds pleasure in those things.[/b]

yes! so doing these things in a dream is not intrinsically wrong; i think. it is only wrong to the extent that it affects your moral character, which may go on to exhibit itself in your real life.

Originally posted by Ex Nine@
<!--QuoteBegin-Asher

\"as a man thinketh, so he becomes\"

No. I just thought of an apple but I didn't become an apple.

Ex Nine, sometimes i can't tell if you're joking or not . . .

I'm serious!

Thoughts don't just change everything!

---------

Sorry, kage, I do not like the thought that I am projecting ambivalence. For example, I thought I was communicating something very incisive in a light-hearted comedic way.

What did that thought do for me? Not a lot! See?

There's proof all over the place.

Originally posted by Ex Nine
I'm serious!

Thoughts don't just change everything!

---------

Sorry, kage, I do not like the thought that I am projecting ambivalence. For example, I thought I was communicating something very incisive in a light-hearted comedic way.

What did that thought do for me? Not a lot! See?

There's proof all over the place.

no prob, Ex. i was actually being a bit facetious. i can usually catch your humour and figure out the point you were trying to get across. sometimes i think other people might not be able to, but i don't know. maybe i'm wrong. maybe i underestimate everyone here.

dream ethics. heh. you guys are funny.

I chose Sometimes.

As a virtue ethicist, I consider morality to be concerned with character traits, developing good ones (ie virtues) and acting in accordance with them. (Read Aristotle for more details on that (best read alongside a guide).) So, committing acts of crime, violence or general depravity in your dreams may or may not be bad. That will depend on whether or not by doing this, it's making you are more violent or depraved person. If it was, then it'd be pretty bad. Consequences could spill over into the real world (that's not relevent to virtue ethics, but I just thought Utilitarianism might be more appealing to some here).

But, does going around and chopping heads off everybody you see in your dream make you develop a taste for wanton carnage? It might or it might not, depending on how you see the act. Just like playing videogames where you do this sort of thing. Are you killing/slicing/stabbing/shooting/clubbing/burning/raping to get sadistic pleasure from the simulated pain of your 'victims'? If so then you suck. Have a nice day!

Originally posted by Citrusponge
I chose Sometimes.

As a virtue ethicist, I consider morality to be concerned with character traits, developing good ones (ie virtues) and acting in accordance with them. (Read Aristotle for more details on that (best read alongside a guide).) So, committing acts of crime, violence or general depravity in your dreams may or may not be bad. That will depend on whether or not by doing this, it's making you are more violent or depraved person. If it was, then it'd be pretty bad. Consequences could spill over into the real world (that's not relevent to virtue ethics, but I just thought Utilitarianism might be more appealing to some here).

But, does going around and chopping heads off everybody you see in your dream make you develop a taste for wanton carnage? It might or it might not, depending on how you see the act. Just like playing videogames where you do this sort of thing. Are you killing/slicing/stabbing/shooting/clubbing/burning/raping to get sadistic pleasure from the simulated pain of your 'victims'? If so then you suck. Have a nice day!

yes, i tend to agree with most of what you say here concerning virtue ethics. (although i wouldn't consider myself a strict virtue ethicist - sometimes, utility can override virtue.) but my impression is, in general (and of course, there are always exceptions), committing depraved acts in a dream (as long as it doesn't become your nightly habit, or go over the top - moderation is key) will not negatively affect your actions in the real world. in fact, i think that most people who would do such things in dreams or videogames are doing so in order to relieve tensions and stress. in a dream, when i get pissed off at mr. bush for his many stupid policies, actions, and sayings, i can beat him, or shoot him, or flick boogers on him, or whatever. i could not do this in real life. even if it were not for moral considerations, it's still a pretty dumb idea to try to do any of those things. in a dream, however, i can do any and all of them, without any consequence, except that i might feel a little bit better about the world when i wake up. half the point of lucid dreaming is to do things that you can't do in real life. (by the way, when i play games such as GTA, i rarely kill/slice/stab/shoot/club/burn/rape to get sadistic pleasure. usually, i do such things only to progress the storyline, complete missions, or set records. on the rare occasions that i do it purely for sadistic pleasure (and yes, it does happen occasionally) it's when i've had a really awful day, and i'm just pissed off at everything and anything.)

Hmm... I'll have to make stuff up as I go along. Could be fun and confusing.

About that W Bush example: I'd liken that to making a Flash game where you can shoot Bush by clicking on a photo of him, or something like that. I'm sure many of these exist, and are meant to be for fun. I don't think the fun comes from the game sending feedback to the effect that the Bush character is suffering. Not for most people anyway. I hope not. The point of those are humour and... oh yeah, as you say yourself, stress-relief. Dreams like that would be the same morally... maybe?

And GTA rampages. I don't do that much. not even in GTA. But I enjoy the regular Mercinaries bash in Resident Evil 4. Not necessarily to get a high score, sometimes just to run around popping heads. What fun do I get out of this? To get satisfaction from taking revenge on the hordes that beat me up when I was a n00b at the game? Exploding meaty chunks is a truly beautiful sight to behold. That's not making me depraved, is it? Nobody's getting hurt, I'm not pretending to hurt them; I really don't like it when my in game enemies cry out in pain(!). Maybe I'm just shaping my ethical position around trying to justify my views. I'm gonna wash some dishes now :]

Originally posted by Ex Nine
I'm serious!

Thoughts don't just change everything!

---------

Sorry, kage, I do not like the thought that I am projecting ambivalence. For example, I thought I was communicating something very incisive in a light-hearted comedic way.

What did that thought do for me? Not a lot! See?

argh, i glanced at this post and now i just have to put in my 2 cents...

that thought did you a lot for you... you simply had to put it into words.

thoughts by themselves are very weak. they do have the power to change, but often they have to be put into words and actions, especially on an internet forum where all we have to transfer thoughts is words.

get it?

think of it this way... everything begins with thought. nothing happens without it. thoughts are the base for all of existence.

lol, I can agree that it would be very easy to get sadistic pleasure from beating up Bush in a dream!