[Kraftwerk]

For the fact that the majority of posts in this thread discuss the definition of choices as right/wrong based upon subjective morality, I am surprised that only traditional morality is being discussed. Nobody has explicitly mentioned or gone into greater detail regarding rational morality. Since Yendor has been the largest proponent of subjectivity when it comes to the individual's actions, let me posit this to you:

For use of the term morality in describing actions as right(moral) or wrong (immoral) that ensure evolutionary survival; our species and most species that exhibit group tendencies also exhibit actions which are defined as moral based upon the fact that the individual makes sacrifices and/or acts in a selfless manner in order to become a proponent of group life and thus improve odds of survival.

Let me provide an example - Some groups of vampire bats have exhibited actions as eating a surplus of food while others eat none, the bats that enjoyed an excess amount have been seen regurgitating their food to prevent the starvation of others. This behavior and selfless act is accepted because the bats accept a morality that survival is essential, and sharing one night will guarantee the returned favor another night.

If one accepts this train of thought for defining morality through rationality and survival it becomes much easier to remove the subjectivity from the situations presented earlier throughout the thread. For these situations view the continued existence of a server where there is a large playerbase as the evolutionary goal for survival, and the slow abandonment due to recurring unejoyable situations as the threats to the group's existence. There are two points that seem to be unanimous in this thread and that makes the previous assumptions valid - a) Having a camp stolen under similar circumstances is not enjoyable and b) playing Everquest with many other people on this server is fun.

Example 1 - Rilen dies, returns 10 minutes later and explains that he has been camping AC for the entirety of the day. Several un-related players in the same zone support this claim. The choice then falls upon the VD members to make a decision with the information presented to either act in the right (morally) - return the camp and make Rilen's time on the server enjoyable, with that expectation that at a future date Rilen would reciprocate and thus ensuring the survival (continued enjoyment of the server) for both parties - or act in the wrong (immorally) - deny Rilen the camp and cause a dissatisfaction with group life thus strengthening the threat to evolutionary survival.

Example 2 - Yendor's group in Fearplane rez's several members of a guild to assist them, thus exhibiting the right (moral) action due to it strengthening the value of group life for the people who were rezzed. The guild of the rezzed players proceeds to camp upon the entirety of Mob_Type_A in order to gain all of the loot possible for themselves. In this scenario the guilds can be seen as individuals for the discussion. The Guild monopolizing Mob_Type_A is acting selfishly, preventing the enjoyment of the server and group life for the other members in Fearplane. The guild's selfless actions are thus threatening the survival of the server by preventing the desire for other members on the server to continue existing on the server. The guild's actions are thus wrong (immoral).

It is entirely up to the individual to choose an action. Judgement does not have to play a role in deciding the morality of someone's actions, which then removes the subjectivity that has been championed throughout this thread. If you view the morality of actions more rationally and in terms of each individual's expectations for group life (Which have been widely agreed upon in this thread as a) Losing a camp within a 5-10 min period due to unforseeable circumstances is not enjoyable and b) The continuted existence of this server with a large playerbase is fun) as they relate to the server's evolutionary survival, then objectivity is much easier to determine. And through this the actions of many players can be seen as immoral or wrong.


Even while typing this I realize that I have also only brought up another question of subjectivity that I am sure will get jumped upon - who decides what is or is not enjoyable for the individual and thus perpetuates the survival of the server by each member's continuted existence on the server. What one may see as no fun, having a camp "acquired" by new parties within 5-10 minutes of "losing" said camp, another may enjoy wholeheartedly. But any argument in this thread is only going to raise more questions. This was more or less something for Yendor to ponder since he has been firm behind the idea that morality is subjective, and I wanted to show him that this is not entirely true.