The Morality of Being a Trainer

52 7 11

So I take business ethics, and it's a philosophy class. And I've learned some very philosophy things while trying to write papers and understand the arguments people make about business.

But business is business and that's not my only interest. I really like Pokémon. And, personally, I would really like to take a moment to explore some of the underlying philosophies.

Like, what do trainers owe to their Pokémon? Aka, is it moral to be a trainer? And if it's moral to be a trainer what do trainers owe to society? What do Pokémon owe to society? There's a lot of questions out there to answer and it's funny, because there's several arguments that are already posed under the surface of the games, anime, and other text.

In this article/random book entry I plan to go through some of those arguments and questions. Both as a way to kind of help y'all improve some of the innards of your characters, but also a way for you to kind of sort yourselves out on what you agree or disagree with in terms of these arguments.

Because some of them are compelling but maybe not true, some of them are not but bring up interesting points. And it's up to you to decide what you agree with. Personally, I disagree with N and I disagree with Team Rocket, as well as trainers like Paul. I'm hoping by writing this I come to my own "reflective equilibrium" where I can decide what trainers owe to their Pokémon.

So without further ado, let us begin

I'm also gonna take a quick moment to tag some people who I thought might be interested:

-sxftsmiles ImberLapis Cora-chan BlueSapphire718 sapphiregrace1224 JustBluePanda

So for everyone here who is probably not familiar with the way philosophy arguments work, to understand them best we line up a set of premises (statements) which you can logically follow to a conclusion.


P: Beyoncé is a woman.
P: All women are mortal.
C: Beyoncé is mortal.

And this argument is both VALID (aka it's not like 2+2 = 4 and charizard is orange so it's going to rain tomorrow) and SOUND (all the premises are true).

It probably sounds super boring, but when you're talking about actual things it's not. For example something a little more general and an argument we looked at recently:

P: Shareholders risk their resources by buying into a company.
P: Because their resources are at risk, the company is obliged to follow the will of the shareholders
P: The shareholders wish to make as much money as possible

C: The company should make as much money as possible

Ok? But is that true? It is true, that the shareholders put their money at risk by investing. However, think about the other questions. What if the shareholders have a dispute? How does the company decide what to do when they need to follow their will? And is it true that the shareholders wish to make as much money as possible? (Hint: it's not. There exists people like nuns groups that actually go and buy into companies to make sure the company is doing what they deem socially responsible)

We can do the same thing with Pokémon.

Take what I view to be the main argument of say, a group like Team Rocket:

P: Pokémon are captured by humans.
P: Anything captured by humans is considered property.
P: You can do anything you want with your property.

The Blue CityWhere stories live. Discover now