This blog post explores the issue of murder in simulations and games, examining free will and ethical dilemmas. We consider whether killing characters in games is ethically justified.
The film The Thirteenth Floor is a 1999 German science fiction film directed by Josef Rusnak, starring Craig Bierko. It centers on a simulation world built around future technology and poses philosophical questions about human existence. The film opens in 1937, beginning with the arrival of a wealthy grandfather at a luxurious hotel. The grandfather entrusts a letter to the bartender and, just as he returns home and is about to fall asleep, suddenly finds himself transported to a modern building in 1999. This scene is a crucial moment symbolizing the entry into the film’s complex simulated world.
The film centers on the story of Hannon Fuller, who invented the simulation game, and his colleague and protagonist, Douglas Hall. In 1999, they created an elaborate simulation game set in 1937 Los Angeles. Through this game, they could enter the simulated world as alternate selves via the device in The Thirteenth Floor. Fuller pursued a life of pleasure within these simulated worlds, but one day he was mysteriously murdered, with all evidence pointing to Douglas Hall as the culprit. However, Hall had no memory whatsoever of the day Fuller was killed, and the film’s main plot revolves around Hall unraveling the clues to uncover the truth.
The shocking revelation in the film’s latter half is that even the year 1999, where Hall lives, is itself another simulated world. Another version of Douglas Hall, actually living in the future, created this simulation and had repeatedly enjoyed committing murders within this virtual world he created. Ultimately, the future Hall confronts the 1999 Hall. The future Hall attempts to eliminate his simulated self, but with the help of his future wife, the 1999 Hall swaps consciousnesses with the future Hall and travels to the future, concluding the film.
After watching this film, I found myself pondering several ethical questions. Is killing a being within a simulation truly ethically unproblematic? In the film, the future Douglas Hall never grappled with this issue at all. He freely committed murder within the virtual world he created, feeling no guilt whatsoever in the process. This premise resonates with today’s gaming world. Modern game developers focus intensely on making non-existent virtual worlds increasingly realistic, aiming to let players experience actions they couldn’t perform in real life as if they were real. Murder and violence frequently appear in these games, and players derive pleasure or a sense of accomplishment from them. We don’t feel guilty for killing characters in a game.
However, the film poses a question that goes a step further. When the characters within the simulation are not mere programs, but act with free will and emotions like humans, is killing them still ethically acceptable? The characters in the games we’ve played so far can be considered simple machines, lacking both free will and emotions. But the characters in The Thirteenth Floor’s simulation adapt to their surroundings like real humans, communicate independently, and live their lives. This inevitably raises the question: is killing them truly justifiable?
A film that tackles a similar issue is I, Robot, released in 2004. This film centers on Sonny, a robot capable of feeling emotions and making independent judgments, raising ethical questions about the relationship between humans and robots. Unlike other robots, Sonny in the film feels emotions and makes his own decisions. This raises the question of whether human rights should apply to beings possessing free will and emotions.
Ultimately, the reason killing within the simulation or eliminating robots becomes an ethical issue is because they are not mere machines; they possess autonomy and emotions akin to humans. The scene in The Thirteenth Floor where the simulated detective pleads with the creator to leave them be is profoundly striking. What they desired most was not physical substance, but free will. They believed that the moment their free will was taken away, they would lose their very reason for existence.
Through this film, I arrived at the conclusion that a thinking being can indeed be considered human. René Descartes’ proposition, “I think, therefore I am,” supports this discussion. I believe that any being capable of free will and independent choice should be included within the category of human, regardless of its physical nature. This is also why the simulated characters in the film or entities like the robot Sonny are not mere machines or programs.
However, one crucial question remains: Does this ‘freedom’ we believe we possess as humans actually exist? In the 19th-century deterministic worldview, the dominant thought was that everything was already predetermined, and humans merely followed that course. However, the emergence of quantum mechanics in the 20th century rejected this strong determinism, seemingly resolving the question of freedom’s existence.
In conclusion, I believe beings possessing free will should be included within the category of human beings. In today’s world, where strong determinism has been excluded, if characters within a simulation or robots can freely choose and act, ethical questions inevitably arise. They should be respected as beings no different from humans.
