Are Pokémon-Fights wrong?

[Capt. Pika]

Hello!

Japan has its own attitude to animals. Insect-Fightings for example, where arthropods like insects, spiders, scorpions or crabs are fighting against each other till one of them die, are very common. Fish- and Cockfightings are also pretty common in asia, but the government trying to ban them. But there are these traditional japanese dog fights. The Tosa-Inu-Fightings! That's like sumo wrestling with dogs. The dogs are not allowed to bite or kill each other.
As you can see japan has an other attitude to animal fightings than america and europe. (Except England perhaps. Before dog fighting was outlawed there it was a glorious sport where you earn enough money to live, nearly like in the world of Pokémon.)

Do you think it's right to let Pokémon fight and suffer for fun and money? Would you like to be a Pokémon without free live, who must obey his/her trainer? Is Pokémon a kind of harmless animal fightings? Please let me know what do you think!

Thank you for your answers and sorry for my bad english!

Here some links for more information:
Japanese Insect-Fightings -> japanesebugfights.com
Sample video of a traditional japanese dog fight -> blog.travelpod.com/travel-blog-entries/niknash/nippon-2006/1153119120/tpod.html
Wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog_fighting
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockfight
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect_fighting

 

[Rivvon]

In the realm of Pokemon, I don't think they're ethically wrong. In some parts of the games it is mentioned that wild Pokemon fight each other for fun and sport, and for more primitive reasons such as food. There are also cases such as the Mystery Dungeon series where Pokemon are completely separated from humans but still regularly battle. So unless the Pokemon is being abused or made to fight after fainting, battles are natural for Pokemon to engage in.

Even though Pokemon have to obey orders once captured with Poke Balls, they can still display their true emotions. If Pokemon really didn't enjoy battles, there would be no way for your Pokemon to have high happiness.

 

[Thursday]

Wow, Rivvon basically hit this one on the head.

 

[Sandshrew4]

At Capt. Pika, are you part of team Plasma? I don't believe it is right to make a pokemon fight against its will but there are pokemon who want to fight. But why not just solve the whole problem by feeding your pokemon tons and tons of food and participating in pokemon sumo instead!? I'm a big supporter of Pokesumo XD

 

[Capt. Pika]

I know there a wild pokémon, which fight for fun but does that justify Pokémon battles? Cats fight against each other just for fun, too - but cat fightings are not legal.

 

[93Aiwass]

Even though Pokemon have to obey orders once captured with Poke Balls, they can still display their true emotions. If Pokemon really didn't enjoy battles, there would be no way for your Pokemon to have high happiness.

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.​

That is true in some aspects, after all - if Pokemon didn't enjoy battles, there would be no way to have a high happiness and friendship stat (which became a factor in G/S/E). However, they do not necessarily have to obey and one of the most provable example is those Pokemon traded which will not obey if the trainer does not have enough gym badges.

Love is the Law, Love under Will.​

 

[Rivvon]

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.​

That is true in some aspects, after all - if Pokemon didn't enjoy battles, there would be no way to have a high happiness and friendship stat (which became a factor in G/S/E). However, they do not necessarily have to obey and one of the most provable example is those Pokemon traded which will not obey if the trainer does not have enough gym badges.

Love is the Law, Love under Will.​

That is very true; I was thinking more along the lines of B2W2,

Spoiler:

where some Team Plasma members mention that once a Pokemon is caught in a Poke Ball it is forced to obey its original Trainer.

Once it's traded, though, it's not under the control of its OT, and then it will need a badge as you've mentioned.

I know there a wild pokémon, which fight for fun but does that justify Pokémon battles? Cats fight against each other just for fun, too - but cat fightings are not legal.

I see where you're coming from, but the reason why animal fights like that are illegal is because the animals are made to fight against their will, even if they would fight for play normally. Under the context of the Pokemon universe, it seems that Pokemon naturally enjoy fighting, especially when under a command of a trainer, so I would not view it as unethical unless, as I've said before, they were being abused while doing so.

 

[Necrum]

In the Pokemon games, there is a strong emphasis on building a strong friendship with your Pokemon as you battle. You rely on them, and they rely on you. It's a symbiotic relationship, and the only people who are ethically wrong are the bad guys, who steal or abuse Pokemon. Pokemon are held in very High regard in their universe, and the culture of the Pokemon world is even different from Japan's. To say that this is comparable to dog fighting is not entirely untrue, but to relate it in the negative is WAY off.

Plus Pokemon are semi sentient and could refuse if they wanted to. Only the Teams would force a Pokemon to fight if it didn't want to.

 

[Capt. Pika]

There are also dog breeds which want to fight. It goes so far that these dogs get psychiatric problems if they don't fight.
Do you want to be my friend when I send you in a fight where you become poisoned or burned? Is that the way you deal with your friends? Are Pokémon masochistic?

 

[Rivvon]

There are also dog breeds which want to fight. It goes so far that these dogs get psychiatric problems if they don't fight.
Do you want to be my friend when I send you in a fight where you become poisoned or burned? Is that the way you deal with your friends? Are Pokémon masochistic?

Pokemon do not necessarily react to poison and burn the same way a human or real-life animal would. It is difficult to apply real-life examples to Pokemon because they are fictional beings which function, mentally and physically, differently than real, existing beings.
In other RPGs in which humans fight other monsters and humans using fists, feet, and magic, there is no argument as to whether it is ethical or not. That is because the fantastical element is still understood. Pokemon, while they can still befriend humans and have a more believable aspect to them, still needs to retain its fantastical element. Real-world logic does not apply here. Pokemon logic does. In the Pokemon world, we need to live by its logic. Its logic states that Pokemon enjoy fighting for sport; therefore, it is ethical for Pokemon fights to be held.

 

[Capt. Pika]

The peripatetic axiom is: "Nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses" which was once said by Aristoteles (Latin: "Nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu"). That means every medium, artwork, book, film, fictional whatever has its origin in the reality. So Pokémon are symbols or metaphors for something probably animals but maybe for something other.
An example: Do you know "War Of The Worlds"? It's a story about the colonization of America. The aliens represent the settler and the humans represent the natives.
What's the statement of Pokémon?

 

[Yellow Silver Nostalgia]

It's horses for courses really. I think the only places Pokemon should fight are in Pokemon gyms, and with other Pokemon of the same species or type. And it shouldn't be "fight 'till you faint", it should just be play fights really, as a way of challenging each other and having fun without trying to hurt each other, similar to how dogs play with other dogs.

For example, a Machamp fighting a Machamp is fair, as long as they don't get too aggressive. Similarly, an Alakazam fighting a Hypno is fair (although how they would fight, I have no idea... probably some kind of third eye staring contest). Pokemon playing sports would be good as well, or playing chess... or dancing!!!

 

[coolcatkim22]

Spoiler:

where some Team Plasma members mention that once a Pokemon is caught in a Poke Ball it is forced to obey its original Trainer.

What about the this quote from B/W:

Spoiler:

Capturing a Pokemon in a Poke Ball doesn't mean you've captured its heart. ~ Drayden

Though, I guess it all really depends on who you think is more credible.

 

[Necrum]

The peripatetic axiom is: "Nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses" which was once said by Aristoteles (Latin: "Nihil est in intellectu quod non prius in sensu"). That means every medium, artwork, book, film, fictional whatever has its origin in the reality. So Pokémon are symbols or metaphors for something probably animals but maybe for something other.
An example: Do you know "War Of The Worlds"? It's a story about the colonization of America. The aliens represent the settler and the humans represent the natives.
What's the statement of Pokémon?

It's commonly known that Pokemon's real world influence is not animal fights, but bug collecting. That's why people catch Pokemon and trade for ones they don't have. The fighting merely came from a need to have a real gameplay mechanic. A game where all you do is collect would be pointless, plus you need a tool to do your collecting with.

 

[Murkrow]

if you think of pokemon as mere tools or weapons that you keep in a ball,
releasing them just to force it to fight like cocks/spiders or stuff it full of TMs and drugs to make them stronger for fights
, yes its wrong in the ethical sense.

if you treat your pokemon like as if its an extension of yourself or as a best buddy/ comrade-in-arms, treating them as equals and with love and respect...

IMO the issue here is not the pokemon fight itself, but the context and the situation leading to and after a fight

Often when you think of dog/insects-fights in real life, the reason why they are banned is cos of the the former situation where the person owning them have no sense of responsibilty or ethics watsoever in treating their pets well. Lose a fight? Ditch it/let it die to get a better one. The animal feelings are not taken into account at all and many dismiss it as trivial and not comparable to that of a human, which is horribly untrue.

 

[LividZephyr]

It's NOT okay to do what Silver did in G/S/C and use his Pokemon as tools of war. That's going too far, and is hazardous to life all around him, including that of his Pokemon.

It IS okay to have regular battles, as long as you know when to call them off. As long as the Pokemon only faint instead of get seriously injured, then you know you're doing and it's all okay.