A "sin" to play computer games?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

At this point in my spiritual journey I would consider myself a progressive Christian of kinds, I would say that I’m not as convinced as other progressives are in their convictions but at present my current view on “sin” I believe transcends the constraints of any particular religious standpoint. To me to sin means to do wrong, or trespass against either yourself, your neighbour or the great mystery/God/higher universal perpose. I think that all people can draw from their own human experiance to understand the difference in what is right and wrong within this moral context. Views will of course be subjective as all experiance is unique, though patterns can often be found with which we can seek to draw overall (semi-)objective conclusions of a “normal” sociatal morality.

With this pretext in mind I ask you, is playing computer games a sin? There are some important points to consider before you go with your gut feeling on this topic (though that doesn’t mean that your intuition is wrong persay).

  1. The Bible can (often) be used as a resource for teaching morality amongst people who are not necessarily christian; like all other religious texts I am sure, however as I have more of an extensive view on this set of books I hope none will take offence of my using it now to iterate a moral principal contained within.

Matthew 5: 21-22, 27-28
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother ]will be subject to judgment.”

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”

The definition that I ascribe to this message is that if you harbour and cultivate lustful, hateful or otherwise immoral thoughts/feelings then you might as well have committed the act itself. Though I feel actions and desires are different, so to truly create a synonymous relationship between desire and act would be to say that if you could get away with it you would do it. For example if you look at a woman and think “wow she’s hot!” You’re human. If you mentally undress her you may be treading on morally slippery ground that could lead to lustful thoughts and feelings, and (eventually) may lead you to the final state: If she came up to you now and asked you for sex you would cheat on your wife. It is this final state that is IMO synonymous with the act. Though it is rare that anyone may play games to act out their real life TRUE desire to murder, it could be considered an (unproven) factor towards developing an unhealthy and violent lifestyle.

  1. Computer games are not real, in fact is comparing computer games to a violent novel not the same concept if one draws pleasure from the imagined act? Or does it have to do with the visual stimulus and often far higher volume of death that is found in a computer game that appeals to the carnal destructive part of our mind/soul? Furthermore does the context of the game matter? For example is GTA sinful/immoral because it at times glorifies killing innocents for money, where as dead island involves for the most part, killing zombies, though the brutal visual effects are far more… Well brutal.

  2. Gaming is highly time consuming, is the loss of all that time in our lives really beneficial to our own interest, the interests of our neighbours or the interests of the universe? Does the “sinful” nature of the act depend not on the type of game or even games themselves, but rather how and why you use them, ie do yo use them to blow off steam, as a hobby, or an obsession? If games did not exist would your life be richer?

I realise that there is a largely christian context to this post, I want to make it clear that I am not wishing to contest the religious views of anyone on this board, but rather gain a variety of perspectives on this subject both moral or spiritual or as a compilation of the two. I have posted this in the philosophy section as I believe there is a wider angle of views to be drawn from this subject as a philosophical question rather than a purely theological one.

2

This is one of the most destructive ideas in Christianity. It leads decent people to feel unnecessary shame and guilt. Jesus should have spent more time thinking this through and considering all the consequences.
I think the Buddhists have the right idea - when a thought pops into your head, acknowledge it and let it drift away on its own. Don’t dwell on it.

As long as the player realizes that this just a game and any resemblance to reality is purely coincidental, he should be okay. Unfortunately, lots of people can’t separate fantasy and reality.

Well, cleanliness is next to godliness. But if you spend all your time cleaning, then you are not using your time effectively. You gotta use your judgement, play in moderation, don’t become obsessed and seek out a variety of experiences.

3

I used to agree with your view here and indeed the idea of letting thoughts come and go without attaching too much meaning is a great way to promote mental health and often Christianity is promoted in such a way that guilt is felt when certain passages are even mentioned. But I believe that this has less to do with the original messages intended in scripture and more to do with the poor interpretations that we are taught or allowed to interpret at an early age (Often for some reason we appear to read the bible with an autistic mind, and take things far too literally). This passage is to my mind not speaking about the sinful nature of thoughts but rather the intention or pleasure that we allow to grow or cultivate to happen. Thoughts are uncontrollable, it is the nature of the mind to think and imagine, it is also beyond us to prevent emotions. It IS in our power to leave something at this point however, though not without willpower. So if you watch a film that has a sex scene and you enjoy it, there is not a lot you can do about that, but if you rewind and watch the scene again coz “man she was foxy” then you are cultivating that urge. Not judging that as a good or bad thing just using it as an example as sex is often something we are all particularly drawn towards. Of course this is the slippery slope, this does not mean that if she was naked and in the room that you would try and have sex wit her (assuming that the “you” I am referring to is in a relationship making the act adulterous), but arguably the more you cultivate and give in to these feelings the more likely this act is to happen, and once you get to that point it does not matter that she is in the room or not, as you will have slipped over into consenting to said “sin”.

This leaves me in a dilemma, as I like violent computer games (though irl I am a big wet pacifist). However I can see how playing these games could be morally wrong, and in my book if something is morally wrong, you don’t do it, or at least try not to. On the other hand I know that playing games has not caused me to be a violent person, though I cannot say I would not be more or less placid if I had never played games.

4

I like this example, so you are saying that attempting to be infinitely perfect in any aspect of our lives only creates further imperfection? This little nugget of wisdom resonates with me. So long as we are trying, we are moving in the right direction, we don’t need to get to the destination right away.

5

Phyllo does much to mitigate or moderate my inclination to argue for immorality (irl I’m ridiculously moral). Why do they call a three bedroom house with a dining room, kitchen and living room a ‘starter house’??? With that kind of lexicon being thrown around what chance does a young married professional (or in my case unprofessional) have at appling ethics to there work and daily life, I mean I was happy when I got a bike with training wheels because of my poor balance, but I would be humiliated if I never learned to ride a bike without them, not so much because it would imply my lack of skill and coordination but because they’re called 'training wheels"!!! I think any guy who still has self-respect (ah, memories) would do anything, anything, so that they would be able to move to a ‘real’ house and not being stuck with several kids in a ‘starter house’ for 20 years and then on to retirement.

6

How can you claim to be a progressive Christian and claim there are such things as sins?
If god did not want us to play games he would not have invented computers.

7

Not using the term “Sin” is not mentioned in the 8 points of progressive Christianity that are usually used,
progressivechristianity.org/the-8-points/
but that’s OK, progressive Christianity is a term that encompasses many ways of thinking, I know of Christians who do not like the word and non-Christians that still use the word, to me as I have already mentioned the term is synonymous with immoral acts if you prefer.

If we are relating this to what God wants and his invention of all things that implies that God is the typical theistic definition of an anthropomorphized personal God, which I am not sure does “him” justice. Though I am largely undecided on this premise.

8

It’s funny, that’s exactly what strict Orthodox monks teach that a person should do with an unbidden, sinful thought in the book The Mountain of Silence. I practice it myself. What is it that you thought Christians taught on this matter, and from where are you getting your information? I’ve no doubt that any number of Churches are teaching any number of destructive things with regards to this, but I wouldn’t lay the blame all the way back on Jesus.

I have a feeling the “It’s totally fine to pretend to murder people continually in a video game” premise and the “you should let bad thoughts drift away and not dwell on them” premise are in conflict.

9

While I don’t necessarily think playing violent video games turns a child into a murderer, I do believe that some children can become blunted to the idea of violence because of them–that’s why they’re age-rated. On the other hand, we live amidst violence–the media are rife with violence–‘everyday’ type death and/or injury–war–natural ‘acts’ of ‘God,’ ‘unnatural (?)’ acts of man.

BUT–computer games also teach ‘good’ things. Obviously, they expand eye/hand coordination; most importantly, they expand the ability to think, evaluate, and respond quickly to situations that may or may not be violent. This has been shown to be especially good for older people who have no real mental challenges after retirement.

Sin, to me, is deliberate–deliberate flouting of what Judeo-Christians in the WW call ‘moral.’ Is ‘wasting’ time sinful? Doesn’t that depend on your individual moral code? :slight_smile:

10

Depends on the definition of sin. There are too, two types of sins: sins of commission and omission. A kid coming back from school is not sinning if he/she isn’t doing the homework, but that failure of study after school can loosely be attributed to a sin of omission.

Another usage of sin, comes in referring to breaker of diets to “fat” or overweight people: a friend may say to a friend like that, that it’s a sin to indulge in fatty food. Or a friend may say of an extremely tasty food, that it’s sinfully good.

So the sinfulness of playing computer games depends on the usage of the word “sin” and of course another thing: there are some pretty racy computer games out there.

11

Just don’t play them too much.

12

I don’t know where you would draw the line between consenting to the sin and not consenting to it. Thus it is possible for someone to say that even one thought is consent …which is bound to lead to guilt. On the other hand, there is a clear distinction between action and thought. It seems the be the logical boundary between thought which is morally neutral and act which may be evaluated as sin or not sin. You talk about the ‘slippery slope’. I think that at the end of the slope, is a sharp step up to actually performing an act. As long as you do not intentionally climb up that step, you have not sinned.
You are rewinding a tape to repeatedly view a sexy scene. Is it sinful? You are not directly harming anyone by doing it. I think it can be a distraction. And it can lead to an obsession. Both of which may lead to incorrect action in the future because there is so much focus on one particular idea to the exclusion of others.
The sin is in allowing yourself to lose track of what is truly important and to neglect your responsibilities. That is not something which is caused by ‘sexy tapes’ or video games. You can be so obsessed with praying that you neglect your family, friends and social responsibilities.

13 
  For some the slippery slope becomes aa huge jump ok for the slalom, for others an overcoming for health's sake (one way or the other), while still others, a way to understanding how energy transfer takes place in a real sense. And all three types merge somehow by periodic alternation.  Redemption is in this periodicity. The shame is in exclusive religiosity without this synthesis.
14

It depends what version of the religion you believe in, some more liberal Christian groups believe having lustful or sinful thoughts are natural and normal, and only that acting on them is a sin. Where as some think the thoughts themselves should be unnatural, which ironically I think is unnatural. I think some people who gravitate to violence will be attracted to violence, it doesn’t matter the source, most people who play computer games can switch off, for those who can’t then it doesn’t matter what medium they interact in, their pathology will seek out mediums in which to indulge itself or in the worst cases real life scenarios. As if it needed to be said violent media does not encourage violence nor is it a sin I think in any religion worthy of note to think about violence or any sinful act. I personally get the feeling Jesus was speaking about actual acts of violence rather than the thoughts of good men, fortunately although some religion has been pivotal in crafting many secular laws, as ironic as that sounds, they have not been allowed as yet to create a thought police, at least not in modern times. :wink:

15

I’m getting it from Catholic priests who encourage confession of sinful thoughts. And also from Protestants who feel the need to share the fact that they sinned in their hearts.
You don’t think that Jesus is talking about thought-sin in that Matthew passage?

If you go by the Old Testament, God did not mind killing people and he was okay with his chosen people doing it under the right circumstances. Maybe pretending to blast zombies, aliens and the ungodly in a video game is also okay by Him.
But I get what you are saying. Repeatedly playing the game keeps bringing back these ‘bad’ thoughts. If they are not disturbing and if you do not act on them, then are they bad? There is the possibility that these games permit you experience anger and aggression without actually acting them out. The game is a safe release of aggressive tendencies… a virtual punching bag.

16

I think it’s about whether you are reveling in negative tendencies or not. The “safe release” idea idea is complex. I think sometimes it works that way and sometimes it doesn’t.

17

No I think he’s talking about sinful thoughts that lead to sinful actions warning that such things can in fact if left unchecked in your heart lead to sin, not sinful thoughts per se. Protestants don’t need to confess sinful thoughts that were benign for example, Catholics it seemed do, as if somehow the thought itself was sinful enough to encourage a want to confess. I don’t see that as necessary unless you go out and act on that thought, and I guess neither did the more liberal faiths, since they encourage discussion over chastisement for things you never intended to do. You know I am unbiased against both faiths as I think they are both wrong in that they believe in a God, and guilt could in fact cause pathologies to arise where you try and make yourself not have bad thoughts, as if that is even possible, I don’t see the utility in denying our natures, unless, we intend to act on them and have condoned our actions as actionable. I think any religion that tries to use guilt to persuade people to be good when they have in fact done nothing wrong is well meaning but unlikely to reflect reality. Encourage people to reflect on their thoughts sure, to subject them to a moral value system sure, but to see them in and of themselves as something wrong? We all have bad thoughts, me 20 times a day, I am glad I have developed the moral code and conscience not to act on them without religion guilting me into it, I will be damned if I will condemn myself for being a human being though, imperfect and subject to random good and bad thoughts is what we are, we should learn to accept that, not to chastise human nature. I do know what you are saying but I think the sin is in the heart, and should be evaluated by the heart by all good Christians amongst themselves and their community, the sin is only on the soul when it is acted upon.

"For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.” Matthew 15:19-20

And yeah I agree for most people the action of taking out your more base instincts on a “punch bag” is beneficial. :slight_smile:

EDIT, sorry for all the edits I don’t think they conflict with what James said so:

I’ve been thinking more on this and looking a little into it with my reason, I think there is a clear distinction if you think a sinful thought and the only thing that stops you from doing it is a fear of retribution, getting caught, or some other action that will inhibit you then that is a sin, there is clear intent to do it, and you would of if that policeman hadn’t wandered by, that is a sin on your soul as is the law an attempt on murder a sin, just because you couldn’t do it does not mean it was not your intent. But if you thought about doing something and considered it unworthy of you, because you are a good person that is not a sin. No man should have to confess that he was in his heart a good man because he chose not to follow on with a sin, only those who would do it if they could should be reckoned as sinful. You should not I think confess your sinful thoughts unless you had crossed that line into choosing to do them, acted on it with intent whether that bore fruit or not. I think given what I know of The Bible which admittedly is not a lifetime of research that is what it means to hold a sin in your heart but not in your soul. I think that is a slight but important distinction.

18

A “sin” is merely an innately condemning act of misjudgment.
Thus it always depends on your environment as to whether something is a sin.
But then again, many things concerning your environment never change.

For playing a video game to always be a sin, would mean that it will (in your case) always lead to a condemning fate.
For it to be a sin for anyone and everyone, it must always lead to a condemning fate for anyone and everyone… not likely.

The problem is, and has always been, that the individual never knows what nefarious schemes are underfoot by very crafty people and thus cannot, on their own, determine what will lead to a condemning fate.

Taking the advice of others, generally leads to a condemning fate… so now what do you do? :confused:

19

Sorry - I did not realise that there was a “Progressive Xianity” with a capital P.

My next question is how can you call yourselves “Progressive” when you have a dogma, a creed and a set of definitions to follow?
I am amused. :laughing:

20

I think you’re confused about the definition of “progressive”.