As a goal for the new year and following my therapist’s recommendation, I’m here writing about what I think about what I read. It’s supposed to be a post every day about the paper that I’m supposed to read every day but, all of us know how difficult the life is, so I’m here doing my best to publish my comments.
The first paper came to me randomly. I don’t know how I found it, but it was a slap in my face to realize that I hadn’t read about this discussion before. It was something I wanted and expected to read because the Metaverse is not just a naive idea or a simple concept. From its first paragraph, I was excited by the arguments presented, even though it is a response to a previous paper. Probably, this may not be the most conventional way to introduce a topic, but I’m trying to be honest with the process, so I began at the end.
It could be a trend to include the word “virtual” in theoretical approaches across many fields, in an effort to attach the new, broad phenomena related to new technological advances in computer science and behaviors that came from them. However, when I found a mention of virtual metaphysics, virtual value theory, and virtual governance, I needed to examine it closely and The Metaverse: Virtual Metaphysics, Virtual Governance, and Virtual Abundance by Cody Turner does the same with the article ‘The Metaverse: Surveillant Physics, Virtual Realist Governance, and the Missing Commons,’ by Andrew McStay. (Apologies, I’m not going to write nothing about it here now).
Turner was attempting to highlight the complexity of the argument regarding virtual governance using the key concept of virtual realism from Chalmers (2022), which was described as
“states that experiences in virtual worlds can be just as real, meaningful, and valuable as experiences in the physical world”
because clearly, neither our experiences nor our moral rules are splintered, so, it is fundamental to consider with detailed attention the virtual monism that underpins the argument, which suggests that all virtual entities can be classified under a singular status and value. From my perspective, this approach is not only inaccurate, but also fails to deal with the complexity of phenomena related to virtual experiences and digital objects.
In conclusion, I think that it is important to note that distinguishing between mixed reality and virtual reality is not an easy task, especially considering that the metaverse is an empty significant. Therefore, addressing the foundational assumptions of the metaphysical status of virtual entities is crucial if we aim to establish virtual governance. Different perspectives could have varying consequences in practical instances, such as laws and punishments, and in the worst case underestimated their impact in human lives.
PhiTech 