Thursday, April 4, 2013

Utilitarian and Kantian Decision Making in Resolving the Geth-Quarian Conflict


As I sometimes do, I have elected to post an essay that I have written. This particular one was for Ethics, and the prompt was to simply take a situation and analyze what the Kantian and Utilitarian stances are. I got a 94 on this paper, with the only comment being that I simply stated the Kantian viewpoint, rather than arrive at it. Towards the end I was rapidly approaching my page limit, so a bit of rushing to the point was necessary. The situation was also vastly simplified due to the nature of the assignment.

                The Mass Effect trilogy is known throughout the gaming community to be one of the most ethically ambiguous games of all time. Throughout the series, the player is faced with making numerous decisions that have an effect on the outcome of the story being told, with each option usually being Kantian or Utilitarian in nature. While it is often clear to the player which choice is Kantian or Utilitarian, the player sometimes has to abandon their morals for the sake of their own survival. This paper will seek to identify that point of balance, where even a strict Kantian must choose a Utilitarian route, by analyzing an extreme situation such as the resolution to the Geth-Quarian conflict, and its connection to an ongoing crisis.
The major plot of the story is that there is an external threat to the galaxy, known as the Reapers, which intend to destroy all intelligent life in the galaxy. This threat is one that the player seeks to eliminate by any means possible, as the Reapers are an unrelenting threat to all intelligent galactic life. In the time period of focus, a handful of civilizations have already fallen to the might of the Reapers, including Earth. It is the goal of the player to unify the politically fragmented galaxy in order to counterattack the Reaper armada. While it is difficult to be optimistic about the outcome of such a fight, it is the only hope for the survival of any species in the galaxy. The player has seen the destructive capabilities of the Reapers, and understands that s/he must gather the largest fleet possible in order to even stand a chance against the might of the Reapers. This serves as the background for a major part in deciding the outcome of the Geth-Quarian conflict.
Several hundred years before the Reaper invasion, a technologically advanced race, known as the Quarians, began construction of mobile labor units, which would later be called Geth. The Geth were programmed by the best Quarian engineers, and were eventually upgraded to aid Quarian scientists in their pursuit of knowledge. Because the Geth were no longer solely used for labor, they were remotely linked to an artificial neural network, allowing for instantaneous communication and increased computational power. Their collective intelligence was growing at an alarming rate, prompting several galactic laws to be passed which restricted robotic capabilities. These laws were largely ignored by the Quarian scientists and engineers, and they continued to increase the computational power of the Geth. The tipping point came when seemingly at random an agricultural unit asked its Quarian caretaker “Does this unit have a soul?” The Quarian reaction to this was to immediately deactivate the unit, but the signal sent to that unit was ignored. The Geth agricultural unit rejected the termination command, and instead asked the Quarian caretaker what was wrong with it, and what it needed to do to fix itself. The Geth unit did not understand why it was being deactivated. This alarmed the Quarians, as they realized that they no longer had complete control over the Geth. The official Quarian response was to immediately and indiscriminately terminate all Geth units, and the military began executing Geth on site. However, by this point the Geth had surpassed the intellectual capabilities of their creators, and the military units defended against the Quarian aggressors. The civilian Quarian population was largely against the drastic actions of the Quarian government, resulting in martial law throughout Rannoch, the Quarian homeworld. When the military began pursuing those who were harboring defenseless Geth units, it was not long before all-out-war broke out between the Geth and Quarians. Within a year, Rannoch and all of the Quarian colonies had been lost to the Geth, and the entire Quarian population was forced to evacuate their homeworld. It would have been easy for the Geth to pursue the evacuating population, and thereby exterminate their creators, but they instead chose to allow their retreat and live in isolation. It is revealed to the player that the Geth mourn the death of the Quarians, and even built monuments honoring those who initially harbored the defenseless Geth units. The Geth never had any intention of overthrowing their creators, but merely acted in such a manner for the sake of their own survival. The result of the war was that the Quarians were forced to live as a migrant fleet, in search of an uncolonized world where they could settle. They would never find such a world, and as a result the surviving Quarians would harbor a lingering animosity towards the Geth, and would sacrifice anything for the recapture of their homeworld of Rannoch.
                In the meantime, a detached Geth military unit has been aiding the player’s squad in their struggle against the Reapers. This particular unit has been upgraded with Reaper technology such that it has achieved a status of ‘true intelligence’. While this technicality is largely debatable, this is something that the player must accept in order for the Kantian perspective on the situation to be relevant. Upon the outbreak of the Reaper War, the Quarians use this distraction as a chance to retaliate against the Geth, and the player eventually finds themself on the planet Rannoch, with the battling Geth and Quarian fleets overhead. It is understood that both civilizations are completely committed to this fight, and the loss of this battle would likely result in the extinction of the losing side. The player possesses the capability of disabling the Geth neural network long enough for the Quarians to break through the Geth lines, ensuring an overwhelming Quarian victory. At the same time, the player also has the capability of sharing his/her squad mate’s code for ‘true intelligence’, understanding that it will vastly enhance the capabilities of the Geth fleet, spelling out the extinction of the Quarians. While this would be an incredibly difficult decision to make, it is clear that the Kantian decision would be to disable the Geth, and allow the Quarians to reclaim their homeworld, as Kantian’s believe that regardless of the outcome, it is necessary to do what is right. In this case, the right thing to do would be to save the Quarians from extinction, even if it means risking all life in the galaxy. At the same time, it is clear that the Utilitarian decision would be to enhance the Geth, so that they can then be used against the Reapers in the desperate hope of establishing galactic peace, as this would thereby benefit the greatest number of beings in the galaxy.
If the player allows the code to be uploaded, the Geth win the battle above Rannoch. The Migrant Fleet is destroyed, and out of despair a close friend who is Quarian even commits suicide. More importantly, the true nature of the Quarians is seen in these final moments. The armed civilian population demands to retreat from the fight, seeing as the tide of battle has greatly shifted towards the Geth. The Quarian military repeatedly orders a counterattack, which ultimately sentences the Quarian population to death. Even after the code is uploaded to the Geth, the Quarians have a chance to retreat from the fight, but out of sheer hatred and the desire for revenge against the Geth, the Quarian military makes the rash decision to continue the attack. As a result from this conflict, the Geth sustain negligible damage, and serve as an excellent force against the Reaper threat. They agree to help reclaim Earth, and in the process help to rid the galaxy of the Reapers. This is certainly the Utilitarian decision, as it ensures the survival of intelligent life, even though it comes at the price of the Quarian race. While the means by which survival is attained may be questionable, it is clear that it is for the benefit of everyone else; the goal justifies the means. This is what goes into making a Utilitarian decision; a mathematical operation must be done to determine how the greatest net happiness can be achieved. While unhappiness is created through the death of the Quarians, a vast amount of happiness is preserved in the survival of everyone else. For a Utilitarian, the decision is obvious. We can also consider many other factors in making this decision, such as whether the Quarians deserved to win the fight; if they had been punished enough for the mistakes of their ancestors, but this has little bearing on a Kantian/Utilitarian analysis of the resolution. Overall, the Utilitarian decision helps the player the most as in all reality it nearly ensures the survival of intelligent life in the galaxy, but it is not necessarily the most correct thing to do.
If the player instead deactivates the Geth neural network, the Quarians are able to overwhelm the fleet, and achieve an astounding triumph over the Geth. The Quarians are able to reclaim Rannoch, and they begin to re-colonize their homeworld. However, because the fleet was mainly civilian, this means that the Quarian fleet is largely disbanded in the process of colonization. Even with the looming Reaper threat, the Quarians are too proud and ignorant to understand that if the Reapers are not defeated, it will not matter that they just reclaimed Rannoch, as the Reapers will systematically slaughter the remainder of their population. The Quarians offer their military fleet, but it is still badly damaged from the recent conflict, and in all actuality provides very little support to the unified galactic fleet. This proves to be critical in the fight to reclaim Earth, as a majority of the unified fleet is destroyed without dealing much damage to the Reapers. If the player chose to deactivate the Geth, it is very likely that Reapers will not be defeated, and all intelligent life will be destroyed. While the outcome of this decision is unfortunate, this can be seen as the right thing to do. The Kantian perspective is that the results are secondary only to the means by which results are achieved. In this case, it means that the extermination of the Quarians is not justified by victory over the Reapers. Kantians tend to recite the phrase “Fiat justita ruat caelum”, meaning “Let justice be done though the heavens fall”, when debating a decision. To them, even the end of the world is not a reason by which to allow injustice. However, in a case as extreme in the resolution to the Geth-Quarian conflict, this would not be the moral thing to do.
Unlike problems that face us today, all of the outcomes from making this decision can be mapped out. Since this is simply a video game, the player can easily reload a saved file and remake a decision as much as they please.  As such, this allows us to have a unique perspective in determining the correct thing to do. When a situation is pushed to the extreme, it is difficult to advocate the Kantian decision in resolving the Geth-Quarian conflict. When the matter at stake is all intelligent life in the galaxy, it becomes acceptable to abandon your morals and instead do what needs to be done. It is not an easy decision to make, but it the end it is clear which decision is the correct one. It is necessary for the player to choose the Geth over the Quarians, as their support against the Reapers is simply immeasurable. Because of these facts, it is clear that the Utilitarian decision is in fact the most correct decision. Even though the consequences of this decision are tragic, there is simply too much at risk to justify taking a Kantian stance. 

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Suffering

Suffering. If your eyes are open, you see it. If you take your hands off your ears, you hear it. If you put yourself in a bad position, you feel it. Suffering is all around is, it is something that we can learn to ignore, or learn to fix. If you fail at either of those, it will consume you. Suffering is a nasty little beast. We see it on the television, we hear stories of it, and most claim that at some time they were suffering in some way. They are probably right too. We all suffer. People don’t live perfect lives. It’s nearly a law of nature. I’m not perfect, and neither are you. Because of that, we both suffer.
But do we deserve it? Is there such a thing as deserving to suffer? Growing up I asked myself this question every so often, but I never had a definite answer. I was certainly leaning towards the idea that some people did deserve to suffer, but overall people should strive to minimize it. Even when I was young I was a Utilitarian. I’ve always been distant from such situations though. I’ve watched other people suffer, I’ve watched myself suffer. But it was just that, I watched. I didn’t get involved. I didn’t care.
People come to me for advice. They have a problem; they come to me to lay out the facts in front of them. I propose the most logical solution as I see it, and they usually follow it. It serves my ego to see people need me. That is my pleasure. I want to be wanted, and I have found a way to make that happen. Connect the dots and in a convoluted way, I thrive on the suffering of others. It’s not something that I directly enjoy, just the outcomes of it. It makes me wanted.
But do people deserve to suffer? I can go on and on about how it strengthens human resolve, but that would be a waste of time. But even then, that’s a different form of suffering than which I speak of. I’m talking about the type of suffering where you watch all of your dreams, all of your prospects and desires slip between your very fingers. The kind of suffering where you see your life falling apart before your eyes and are completely powerless to stop is; where no matter how hard you try you can never regain the position where you once were. The kind of suffering that you yourself inadvertently caused. That is the worst kind of suffering.
No matter how fast you can run, you cannot escape your own thoughts. They will stay with you, they will haunt you, and they will destroy you. It is easy to take solace in thinking that you are a victim, but if you see your life fall apart by your own hand, is not something that you can escape. It is something that will eat away at you no matter how hard you try to suppress it.
If you want someone to suffer, you need to let them do it to themselves. People can take away houses, cars, food and so on, but nobody can take away someone’s mind. That is the last refuge for the suffering. If you want someone to truly feel pain, you need to take away that haven from them as well. With a bit of foresight, you can nudge people in such a way that they will veer towards self-destruction. Whether it’s the coworker that coasts through life or the person who did you wrong a few years back, suffering is inevitable, and with some luck and foresight you can ensure that they receive it.
Though I still haven’t answered the question. The question of whether or not people deserve to suffer. More recently I’ve though that the answer is yes. Bad people exist. But what do I mean by bad? We exist in a community, but on a fundamental level we all serve our self-interests. I define bad people as those who go against our respective self-interests, whatever they may be. Many of these self-interests likely coincide with societal norms, but that is not something that is particularly relevant to defining a bad person. A bad person is someone who is actively working against the convictions which you have dedicated yourself to. So do these people deserve to suffer? Bad people are simply those who have different motives, and means by which to achieve them.
Recently I came to the conclusion that someone in my life deserves to suffer. Whether it is for what they represent to me, what wrongs they have done to me, it is irrelevant. I realized that it would bring me pleasure to see their misfortune and pain. I wanted to see them suffer, and I wanted to cause that suffering. With a little nudging and a bit of foresight, people can do nearly anything that you want them to. The trick is getting them to believe that they’re doing what they actually want to do. I have sent this person on a path towards self-destruction. I nudged them in just the right way, at precisely the right time.
Yet I have a feeling of guilt. It is unusual though, it is not a typical version of that feeling. I have no remorse for my actions, none whatsoever. I instead feel guilty for wanting someone to suffer, for realizing that it would bring me joy to participate in the suffering of another. In a form of retaliation, I experienced happiness. That is my guilt. That is what will haunt me; not what I did, but what I wanted.