Structure Proposal ver.2

  • First, provide definitions.

  • Start by discussing Is Virtual Reality “Evil”?.

    • Critically analyze and clarify the evaluation criteria based on the previous discussion.
    • Reach conclusions for each evaluation criterion, such as “good” or “challenges.”
  • Then, address the remaining issues.

    • If we adopt the evaluation criteria of Is Virtual Reality “Evil”?, the moral responsibility of artificial creators becomes a focal point.
      • Connect this with meta discussions and provide real-life examples of negative consequences related to capitalism.
    • If other evaluation criteria can be identified, discuss them as well.
      • Begin with the technology itself.

Structure Proposal ver.1

  • Is the “Metaverse” a “Dystopia”? - Normative discussions on a diverse reality.

    • Motivation

      • Frustration with the vague concept of the “Metaverse” and the tendency for it to be criticized based on ambiguous evaluation criteria.
    • What do we want to achieve?

      • Aim for clarity, but be prepared to abandon it if it seems impossible (blu3mo).
        • However, if the content becomes stagnant, it may be necessary to introduce new ideas to keep it interesting, as long as time constraints allow.
    • Definition of the Metaverse

      • While there are various aspects, we want to focus on the aspect of a diverse reality.
      • Definition: ~~~
        • Specifically, ~~~
          • It is important to have a shared understanding of this specific image.
        • This definition also includes concepts such as filter bubbles.
    • Definition of Norms

      • It is better to consider the discussion and approach it from a bottom-up perspective.
    • Framework for the discussion

      • If we introduce futuristic technologies, we can solve anything.
        • We want to define constraints that make the discussion meaningful.
    • Discussions that cannot reach consensus without shared reality.

    • Freedom-related discussions

    • Discussing broadly on each evaluation criterion seems challenging.