This course takes a broad look at several ways video games can teach us about issues in aesthetics. We begin with a focus on the value of play and a distinction between play and gameplay. We can make use of this distinction to emphasize the importance of rules in games and to communicate fundamental concepts in ontology and its fundamental role in art and aesthetics. A distinction between play and gameplay also allows us to consider the different mental states of those who play games and a further distinction between games and the performing arts. Next, this course considers more serious games or games that aim to do more than merely entertain. Such games allow students to draw ethical conclusions and perhaps make broader applications to ordinary life. Of course, video games often have aesthetic value so games can be an excellent resource for discussions about genre, standard formal features, and their unique metaphysical structure. Unlike traditional works of art, most video games do not have fixed outcomes, they can have many different outcomes. Not only does this grant players agency, it has the potential to entangle the roles of players and character identities. This course concludes by considering that games might be best understood through a process-oriented model of art rather than traditional object-oriented models.

BIO: Shelby Moser is an Assistant Professor (Lecturer) in the Division of Games and an Adjunct Professor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Utah. She’s an analytic Philosopher of Art & Games with a specific focus on the ontology of interactivity and rules, the meaningfulness of play in social contexts, and, the aesthetics of games. Her publications include “On Regarding Digital Art”, (Routledge 2023), “The Philosophy of Digital Art”, (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Revised 2023), and “Videogame Ontology, Constitutive Rules, and Algorithms” (Routledge 2018). Shelby also has a background in the history and philosophy of the fine arts focusing on the challenges digital art imposes on museum-driven practices.

  • Aristotle’s, Nichomachean Ethics and the Politic

    Huizinga, Johan. Homo ludens: proeve eener bepaling van het spel-element der cultuur. Amsterdam. Trans. Bvy

    R. Hull (1971) as Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. Boston. University Press, 2008.

    Hurka, Thomas. Games, Sports, and Play: Philosophical Essays. Oxford University Press, 2019.

    Kidd, Stephen E. Play and aesthetics in ancient Greece. Cambridge University Press, 2019.

    Moser, Shelby. Videogame ontology, constitutive rules, and algorithms; In The Aesthetics of videogames, pp. 42-59. Routledge, 2018.

    Patridge, Stephanie. Video games and imaginative identification. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 75, no. 2 (2017): 181-184.

    Patridge, Stephanie. Games, motives, and virtue; Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 48, no. 3 (2021): 369-379.

    Nguyen, C. Thi. Games: Agency as art. Oxford University Press, USA, 2020.

    _______. “The Arts of Action.” Philosopher’s Imprint, 20, no. 14 (2020): 1-27.

    Ridge, Michael. Why So Serious? The Nature and Value of Play; Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 105, no. 2 (2022): 406-434.

    Robson, Jon, and Aaron Meskin. Video games as self‐involving interactive fictions; The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 74, no. 2 (2016): 165-177.

    Suits, Bernard. The Grasshopper: Games, Life and Utopia (3rd Edition). Broadview Press, 2014.

    Tavinor, Grant. Videogames and interactive fiction; Philosophy and Literature 29, no. 1 (2005): 24-40.

    Tavinor, Grant. Virtual worlds and interactive fictions; Truth in fiction (2011): 223-244.