Last Night's Dream: The Inherent Value of Life
A philosophical hotchpotch themed by Log Horizon, Game of Thrones, and my dream based on a past experience in the ICU.
I started binging a new anime' - Log Horizon. It's rated highly on every platform, including Crunchyroll.
As far as Isekais go, the plot holds up to its reputation (unlike "The Rising of the Shield Hero" with its absurdly obvious plot armor. Pun intended.)
But Log Horizon is different. The first few episodes follow the cliche with the main character, Shiroe, a level-90 enchanter and a brilliant strategist exploring the new world he's thrust into. I expected the story to have all the elements of any Isekai—an overpowered villain, a guild (or a kingdom) to save, the power of friendship that would be the villain's Achilles heel—same old, same old.
But the show gets pragmatically philosophical.
The players find themselves immortal as they simply spawn at Homebase after their deaths. Moreover, they still possess the ability to craft items at the press of a psychic "button." This meant that neither large sums of money nor effort were needed to thrive in that world.
However, you may argue this is nothing different from what players do in the virtual world of MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games). They would be farming, raiding, and crafting for countless real-world hours. Indeed, that is the intention of gaming— the challenge to be at their personal best and an MVP (most valuable player) for their guild.
On Earth, every gamer lives two lives (at the least). The first is in the real world with physics, diabetes, voter fraud, and taxes. This world has very stringent survival conditions, and players' decisions aren't "free" of their nurture. They can't load a previous save, and the future is complex and uncertain. Most importantly, they get old and die.
The other world is where they shine the most. They can create multiple characters and craft their destinies with a preferred stat boost. There is no aging, and the rules for fame and success are simple—cursor control and gameplay strategy.
But when players get thrust into the Isekai (alternate reality) as a being, concepts of time, money, space, and even life lose all inherent value.
The show grabs onto oft-cited primatological findings of how a social hierarchy promptly develops in isolated groups. The more experienced and leveled-up players engage in PKing (player killings) and looting the carcasses. Larger guilds subsume smaller ones, while others enslave weaker players to provide their masters with EXP pots.
The world descends into chaos. NPCs (Non-playable characters) get punished for their powerlessness as much as new players. As the strong engage in pillaging, our protagonist is torn apart by the current lawlessness.
Yes, "lawless," or rather, the lack of justice, police, prison, and retribution. Long story short, he devises a devious plan to cut off others' monetary supply by buying off the building which houses the bank. Thus, the oppressed majority are blessed with leverage over the selfish and criminal tendencies of the rich and powerful.
Our protagonist, Shiroe, wants to crack down on the "idle minds" at the root of the Devil's workshop. He requests all players to construct items manually instead of relying on a button. This improved their quality, but also gave people something to do.
But chaos descends once more since nobody could put a proper price tag on their creations. Everything was "rare," as this was the first time anybody crafted anything manually. This takes us back to the beginnings of the concept of "currency" in our world.
I started wondering about the inherent value of anything. For starters, what gives money its value? What about one form of currency over another? We could say it is the purchasing power that decides. Economists devise fancy terms like PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) of different nations. Based on the good (a maid, brand new car, or a home for rent), a country's PPP varies greatly based on an individual's need. But how did early tribes put a value on any good or service?
This contemplation reminded me of a great scene in Game of Thrones where the minister, Varys, poses a riddle to our beloved prince, Tyrion Lannister (I will paraphrase much of the dialogue in the below paragraphs while attempting to maintain its essence.)
A sell-sword finds himself locked in a room with a King, a priest, and a wealthy merchant. Only one of the three could live, and the sell-sword needed to decide on his companion. The King presses that he is the lawfully elected ruler, so he should be the one to witness the future. The priest tries to bribe by affirming his position as a messenger of God. Finally, the merchant dangles his riches and the kind of happiness that money could bring.
Varys asks, “So, who lives and who dies?”
Tyrion objects that there are too many variables. Indeed, it was a trick question. The sell-sword holds the eponymic object that decides the fates of all these men. In that space and moment, he is the most powerful. But he has beliefs and dreams and looks forward to the brightest future he could bring about through this negotiation. With sword in hand, he possesses "leverage," which our protagonist also wields in the anime. But it matters how he would use it.
Varys asks a counter-question, “What makes the King so powerful?” Tyrion replies, “Well, he could command other trained men with swords who could easily bring him the sell-sword’s head.”
Varys interjects well, “But in that case, shouldn’t the other swords hold true power? Why don’t they just oust the King and keep the kingdom for themselves?”
A great question. It also helps us wonder about the rise and fall of fascism and autocracy. Why weren’t all the dictators of our world ousted sooner when it was the populace that held genuine power?
Finally, Varys reveals the answer with this beautiful line of encouragement for our dwarf prince—
“Power resides where men believe it resides. It's a trick. A shadow on the wall. And a very small man can cast a very large shadow.”
The sell-sword would probably prioritize the merchant. He couldn't care less for kings, honor, and glory. Perhaps he is also an atheist, given his proclivity to kill for money, regardless of the circumstance. He is a "sell"-sword, which means he longs for gold. If he were a soldier, it would probably have been the King to see the light of the day. A troubled monk would have left the priest alone.
This is probably a 101 in diplomatic interactions. Seeking leverage and making the most of it. But what makes these topics intriguing is their underlying comment on the "inherent" value of power, and by extension, of life itself. If a player is weak, isn't he asking to be mugged? If a person wields a weapon in a room full of civilians, who can really judge his actions?
All this exposure to moral philosophy precipitated a dream last night. I'm in the ICU, lounging in the chair next to my 80-year-old roommate's bed. My eyes wander into the distance ornamented with the visages of tall mountains and the city skyline.
Suddenly, I see a movement near the window sill where a tiny white spider is making its way to the ceiling.
I start contemplating the ramifications of the different fates I could render for it. I could kill all its dreams of tasting another critter. I could single-handedly obliterate its superior skill of spiral web-building mastery. I could make it struggle and yearn for my mercy.
So is the value of its existence determined by me? Does determining its fate somehow translate into my worth in this world (think bullying)? What if I am stopped in my tracks by the admonitory words of the ailing grandma next to me? In that case, would her utility overrule mine and render it insignificant (think the roots of ego and narcissism)?
Or is this property inherent to the spider regardless of its survival? Would its abilities and intentions decide its value instead? And what if its actions don't lead to desired results? If the spider couldn't construct a web worth grabbing prey, would it be better off as a protein source for the rest of us (think chronically disabled children or seniors euthanized for organ donations)?
Like the weak spider, what are other aspects of our society striving for meaning? Is a lowly freedom fighter valuable to the cause if he dies before he shows his hand? Do we call such deaths those spent in vain? If intentions matter more than results, what about the vanity of social media influencers? They spend thousands in credit card debt and work every moment of their lives for fame and fortune. We might strike them out as petty and stupid. However, we can witness fervent discipline and skilled action for a purpose deemed important by them. We are all striving for meaning, and self-absorption comprises theirs. What makes such lives less influential than the nurse serving in refugee relief camps?
Or…are they?
I woke up before I could decide whether or not to squash the bug. But it was a fascinating ride on the "inherent" value of life, which is the foundation of the works of prominent philosophers like Immanuel Kant.
Although it may seem like idle introspection, these questions often seep into many morally vital and often divisive topics like race, bullying, sex, abortion, life sentence, and euthanasia. It helps us witness moral differences (and failings) due to our parental, cultural, and behavioral influences.
Whether or not to squash a bug, kill a person, or prioritize personal gain over a weaker player in a game depends on our respective belief systems.
But before we pick our move, we better choose wisely, for all our fates are intertwined.
And lest we forget—even a small spider can cast a very large shadow.