IS CATCHING POKEMON WRONG?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- Is catching Pokemon ethical, Is Pokemon a Pokemon master morally okay. I've gone over this a few times from a Pokemon lore perspective and want to compile my thoughts and research here. Was Team Plasma, right?
💫 Become a Patreon Today • / birdkeepertoby
🌲 My Merch Store • birdkeepertoby...
🐤Twitter • / birdkeepertoby
📸 Instagram • / birdkeepertoby
👾 Discord • / discord
👕 Affiliate Gametee • gametee.co.uk/...
#PokemonNews #PokemonLore #PokemonTheory
Thank you Patreons of October:
Nick Hammes
Henry Denvir
Lane Rollins
Sarah Mohr
an outcast
Maude
Aydan Riley
Miresa Wilson
Mark Shock
LivingLightning63
Maroo
Alek PT
Robert Chang
Keven
Shadowloupe
INFIN8
maidenhairtree
Kimai
Anthony Lee
Leesah
Dharc1313
ExHappyFace
Panther J
deena mynors
Eliott Rogers
Lucas Gates
Jedruben
The Dec of Cards
Lorenzo J. Yanez Jr.
PokéMenz
Nathan Arcienega
Gothimo
Roco
Gavvy Duncan
Nick Charles
Jared Jordan
Ryan McBee
Lockstin of Gnoggin
MayaFrost
uhdajorge
wilgrim
SlashingManticore
The_Man_Carlos
smolowo
Florence Millar
Marvin01994
James Pike Jay24092
Heavy Metal Mew
Guillaume Homier
Charmander Aznable
Sam DeLeon
Yoni Sobin - The Nerd Therapist
Steven Reichman
Dakota(Boo) Wheatley
ZephyrHolmes
Libris Simas Ferraz
Tom McKee
Michael Stipp
Victor Angel DeSouza
Matt Squared
Code_Lemia
christie ward
Ed Jepson
Ylva G.
JD
Murray M. Moss
ManInACan
Rees
Héctor Rodríguez
Caleb Nidey
ThatWeebyGamer
Galen "Lea" Skibyak
Toxicsnivy
Edited by / kotlolish
📽 Footage by •
-Mixeli: / mixeli
-Munching Orange: / munchingorange
🎙Music by •
-Hoops and hiphop: / hoopsandhiphop
-Double Acee: / 2headedyeti
-A Cloud Called Klaus: / acloudcalledklaus
🖱Channel Graphics by •
Mike Dean: / filmmakermichael
-Glitch X City / @glitchxcity
![KSI - Thick Of It (feat. Trippie Redd) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/At8v_Yc044Y/mqdefault.jpg)
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
I’m a dog owner and my dog seems to love being owned by me even when I put her in a kennel. You could think of pokeballs as portable kennels.
Good point ! I wish my cat would love being carried around like that !
But yet you could beat your dog with nearly 0 consequences and the dog could not leave the relationship.
This general kind of relationship where the wellbeing of one the members depend on the good will of the other, because there's no freedom, is a hierarchical relationship. This kind of relationship can be seen as being extremely unethical by some ethical philosophies. In our world anarchist and other anti-authoritarian philosophies tend to think like that.
In the world of Pokemon some indigenous (well, kinda) people hold this view, as seen with the Pearl and Diamond clans, so does Team Plasma members and N to a certain extent, and even Rangers (and other inhabitants) from regions like Almia (is it called that in English?) seem to agree.
Anyway, nuance is clearly needed when we talk about those subjects
They are treated as more like terrariums then kennels but it’s a good example
Domesticated vs wild animals is a distinction we have in the real world as we obviously have a symbiotic relationship with domestic animals while pokemon doesn't explore that to the depths we understand household animals to be analogous to theirs. In pokemon you're catching and keeping ALL pokemon of sorts
easy for you to say lol slave masters said the same thing lmao at least consider expanding ur thought!!
That varies amoung animals though. I have a Rabbit and Rabits hate to be confined to a cage or hutch as the like to be able to move freely and run. People don't put them in a cage or hutch to be creul but rather they just don't understand a Rabbit is unhappy like that. So while a Dog might be fine in a kennel, a Rabbit wont be fine in a cage. I wonder if Rockruff is fine with a Pokeball while Lopunny hates it.
I always had this headcannon that in the wild pokemon still fight not only for survivability and food but also to gain "experience" so that they can grow and evolve.
However in the wild the battle doesn't stop at fainting most of the time and ends up killing many pokemon. So trainers catching these pokemon befriending them and then battling with them in a safe controlled environment helps both the trainers and pokemon grow together safely.
Ooh... That's interesting!
When it comes to the question of how Pokémon actually fight and damage each other, I've always though of it less as them literally burning or ripping each other apart, but more of them using their magic to wear each other out and see who runs out of energy first. Assume they all have a sort of natural magic resistance that just makes them lose energy when they're attacked, and it's when that well of magic resistance runs out that they faint from exhaustion. Only once they've fainted is when they can actually be hurt and trainers never let it go that far. Almost like an arm wrestling match in a way, not hurting each other, just testing who's stronger and has more endurance. It's like elemental powers exercise for them. That's always been my reasoning anyway.
And now that I think about it, they want to be trained by humans for the same reason athletes want a really good personal trainer or coach. The more knowledge and experience the trainer/coach has, the stronger they'll get. So really Pokémon are just a bunch of magical fitness addicts who will do whatever it takes to be the strongest. And the strongest trainers you have to overcome are literally at gyms.
Yes
That makes a lot of sense
There is also situations where the Pokemon doesn't want to battle or "become stronger". They just want love & companionship & other purposes; such as Ash's Mom & Mr. Mime. Yes Mr. Mime did fight when absolutely necessary, but he preferred housework and Ash's Mom enjoyed the companionship as well as allowing her to relax.
HAHA I love this POV. Makes me feel a lot better about fighting countless wild pokemon to grind mine up
I think catching and raising Pokemon is similar to having a pet. It's how you treat your pet that defines if it's ethical or not. Of course it's unethical to abuse your pet or your pokemon, just like Team Rocket does. They are the bad guys afterall. But if you treat your pet/pokemon right and take care of them, like you should, it's ethical.
This
Unlike pets Pokemon have human level intelligence
@@madnessarcade7447 Yeah...that's the problem. It's like...still slavery, I'm sorry to say. If they want to stick around because you treat them so well and they get better, fantastic. If they want to leave anyways, if you let them 'cause they want too, even if you treat them well, great. If you don't, they weren't free in the first place now were they?
And with human level intelligence, yeah....it's not like guardian and ward relationships anymore, is it?
You could even make the argument that Team Rocket treats *their* Pokemon with the respect of a pet, it’s just other people’s Pokemon that get captured and abused.
I feel like friendship evolution is an important thing to mention here. From all the way back in Gen 2, we see pokemon like Espeon, Umbreon, and Crobat who are able to achieve these forms through their friendships with their trainers.
If we have sports like boxing, wrestling, archery, and martial arts, why wouldn't another world/ dimension have similar sports.
Also, you'd need to know how to defend yourself from vicious wild pokemon and criminals. How often has Ash had to get one of his pokemon back from Team Rocket without Officer Jenny being right there to help him?
Yes
If we treat HP as a sort of magical stamina bar, leaving them in a fainted state when it runs out, but doing no further harm, then it may be little different from exercising. Overdoing it can hurt you, sure, but with the pokeballs (which can retrieve them almost instantly in most cases) giving them a safe place to rest until their trainers can get them healed, as long as they aren't pushed beyond their limits or abused, no lasting damage is done. Even when humans, with little to no infinity energy/aura to speak of (save for a rare few) are hit with attacks, it rarely does more than knock the wind out of them or cover them in soot, even when they're "blasting off again", team rocket always manage to survive a landing that should kill pretty much anyone. But at the same time, normal rockslides and fires are treated as major emergencies, despite having no magical power involved. So I can't help but wonder if Arceus made it so that infinity energy prevents lasting harm, even as it drains the target's stamina. That might explain why that spearow Ash threw a rock at retained the bump on its head, even after so much time and evolving to boot. It could also explain how humans flourished, despite being in a world where a random bug, rat, or literal bag of trash could hit you with supernatural attacks for accidentally irritating it. And it could give more reason for pokemon and humans to work together. Considering the wars that happened, both are required to fight effectively. Pokemon can exhaust each other's stamina and stop them from fighting, but have a much harder time finishing them off since they're built to use infinity energy naturally, so even when their powers were restricted, there were no casualties in the first movie fight when they were fighting the 'wrong way'. Humans have the opposite problem. They can't overcome the stronger pokemon's magical powers, but they can end their enemy with their normal, physics based attacks when they can land a clean shot. Morbid, yes, but when speaking about the past that shaped the pokemon world we know today, it the possibility can't be dismissed out of hand. Wow this got rambly. Sorry, it's super late, and I'm barely able to stay awake, so I hope what I said makes sense. G'night everybody.
I think it's important to look at this from a fantasy standpoint. I love animals and pokemon, and I really don't consider them to be similar things, I'd never think of real animals in a pokemon context. As for pokemon I really don't see it as a master and follower relationship, I think they are partners. They can do things we can't, and we have them help us and battle in this fantasy world. Friendship is an important role in pokemon, I prefer that when we catch a limited amount of mon and grow a bond rather than pokemonp, go where you catch everything you see and throw it away. The Manga has some more violent themes, and I think they can work on the world and create higher stakes, but pokemon as a whole has moved further away from that.
I actually see it Pokemon in trainer relationships as more along the lines of something of a coach and fighter you know something similar to a boxer, a martial artist, or an MMA fighter. And in a way that's actually what Pokemon battles are
@@zachbahamutson5477agreed
I've always felt it should be up to the Pokémon themselves
that....sounds ridiculous but basically every Pokémon in the anime has shown at least a small amount of sentience. That much is hard to deny. And that's why I think it's great in the anime that they make it clear there's more then 1 type of trainer. There's those that choose to keep them more as pets. They take care of them but don't force battles on them. There's contests where instead of battles they simply show off their powers (which I honestly feel should give just as much exp as doing a battle)
What we need, desperately, is a game or...even a series of games...that shows us more nuance to the world we're all so fond of. I would LOVE a game that let you focus on contests. That let you teach your pokemon how to dance and when to use moves for flourish. That let you mix moves together so you can get fun effects like in the anime.
A game where maybe you run a pokemon farm and you can befriend the mon on the farm to help with tasks. There's so many options and yet basically everything focuses on only the battle portion.
This. 100% this. It would be my dream Pokemon game since I hate the idea of battling all the time.
Wait! Humans are a social species? I've been doing it wrong all this time.
My least favorite pokeball related aspect of pokemon is that Legends Arceus confirmed that the pokeballs dont shrink the pokemon, but the pokemon shrink themselves. I understand that that is probably more just canonizimg the initial ideas behind pokemon but something about the notion of all pokemom being able to shrink is kind of silly to me and somewhat messes with the awe and mystique of gargantuan pokemon like Zygarde 100%, Groudon, and Rayquaza. I personally always looked at pokeballs as amazing feats of invention,now knowing they just house whatever pokemon and all tech does is just keep them safe in stasis makes them less incredible to me.
Awesome video! One great thing that was missed is the dialogue from Dr. footsteps in D/P/Pt who voices your pokemons thoughts. It offers a glimpse into how your pokemon sees you as a trainer, how other pokemon view it, and what they are getting from this relationship. There’s lots of dialogue options depending on your pokemons category and they are all on Bulbapedia. I think its worth checking out! ❤
It’s definitely okay if the Pokémon itself is consenting. This seems to be the case with every good-aligned character and their Pokémon, and even some of the bad guys.
I do agree Pokémon getting caught is being tested. But the Master Ball does seem immoral, as are unnatural transformations like Shadow Pokémon or Mega Pokémon. However, let’s be honest, we will continue using anything we’re given, even if it’s bad.
Yep pretty much lines uip with my thoguhts. Megas evolution I'mo n the fence about
@@BirdKeeperTobyI don't remember who I heard this from but there is an idea that the reason why mega evolution requires a deep bond between a Pokemon and it's trainer is so the Pokemon can stay in control, along with easing the pain caused by so much new power.
We even see something along these lines in the anime with korrina and her Lucario.
I agree on the masterball point (assuming it isn't 100% capture rate because it's under handed but because no pokemon could possibly conceive of a better place to live.) not necessarily agree with mega evolution no pokemon actually displays any pain whenever they transform, they don't complain, they don't refuse, they don't destroy the keystones, and the only thing that tells us that the pokemon is in pain is pokedex entries. which is a dubious source of information as it is.
I have to disagree with the whole Mega Evolutions being unnatural, but Shadow Pokemon definitely are unnatural. Also I really don't like the whole retcon that Mega Evolution causes pain maybe if it was so much as if you don't have a strong bond with your Pokemon the Mega Evolution would hurt.
@@ShiroNekoDen Going off the dex. Obviously they’re not gonna animate the mega evolution process being painful. This is for kids.
It should also be noted that a lot about Pokemon that WE as players deal with is due to gameplay issues rather than lore issues.
Like trade evolutions or battling.
Canonically, Pokemon can leave the Pokeball... canonically, we can't catch Pokemon that fainted because that means they find us unworthy and the Pokemon has to choose the trainer as well...
And if a Pokemon dislikes the trainer... they can choose to leave...
It's just that Pokemon are more loyal than humans... so you'd REALLY have to piss them off for that too happen.
I suspect the connection with a human creates a symbiotic exchange of energy. Aura for mega energy. By this bond both human and Pokémon are protected from real harm.
i'm so sad that after all these years i won't see new pokemon vids from you anymore soonish
You’re the first person who has addressed this in a level headed way that makes sense. Thanks so much for this vid.
This reminds me of some videos I watching recently about tracking dogs. Like bloodhounds. The dog by itself would probably not be able to find a target very quickly. And the human wouldn’t even know where to start. But together, the dogs nose and the humans eyes and brains, they can work together to track complex moving targets. It’s two being working together to achieve greater feats than either could alone.
So maybe that’s what Pokémon is going for. In our world, this works because dogs are domesticated and we bred them to want to work with us and to thrive with us.
Pokémon aren’t domesticated, but I like you making that distribution that their world, lore, and gods make their moral codes have a slightly different basis.
I also think Pokémon are clearly shown to be more sentient than animals. Pokémon seek to have human levels of intelligence (if not higher, like some psychic Pokémon). So it stands to reason that they can rationally think and decide to work for/with their trainers or not.
We don’t make them battle it’s a consensual experience
It’s a bonding experience they can choose not to listen if they don’t want too
Pokémon battles are about consent
In the lore Pokémon aren’t just a dog or a cat they have human level intelligence
The battling are like brothers in arms it’s a shared experience that brings them closer together
They have to trust you as well
It’s ethical because
They willingly enjoy it
The franchise is an allegory on the preservation of nature and encourages you to appreciate nature it’s in the lore
Like in the anime with Charizard disobeying lol
As the og theme said
Pokémon is about
Oh your my best friend in a world we must defend
I will travel across the land searching far and wide each pokemon to understand the power that’s inside
Our hearts so true our courage will pull us through
you teach me and I teach you”
That’s what it is about and that’s what it will always be about and if that’s what it continues to be about until the end
The lore does say that Pokemon become Stronger when they have Trainers
Mega Evolution might be a more Complicated thing, like maybe it's actually like overloading The Aura of Pokemon.
I see HP as an Aura field that Weakens when a Pokemon is hurt, They don't actually get hurt but their Aura field is disrupted. Catching a Pokemon in a Pokeball might just be a container for their Aura energy their Infinity Energy is stored to Then heal the Pokemon to regain enough of their Aura Field to not be exhausted
the guy who gives your pokemon the footprint ribbon also says that wild pokemon are jealous of your pokemon when you have high friendship with them, at least thats what he says he's translating for you
I noticed in the newer games and anime they stress the close relationship and friendship between humans and Pokémon. It’s fictional so are they’re feelings so we don’t know how they would feel if they were real.
Yet you can't pet pokemon during picnics in Scarlet/Violet
I believe it's pretty simple.
Pokemon are in general the archetypal "proud warrior guy".
They enjoy fighting, getting stronger and have no respect for those they consider beneath them.
This is the reason traded Pokemon don't listen to comands of trainers they don't respect. If it's a trainer they have lost against, wether by brute force or tactics, they respect you.
Of course, like with everything, there are exceptions to the rule .
7:51 Wait if Grooket destroyed its own pokeball in the anime and was fine I guess that would disprove the creepypasta/theory of what would happen if u destroyed a Pokemon's ball as in it would die.
I love love love this Toby. Feel like I’m watching an Umbreon Libris vid. So great to hear you dissect Pokémon topics
Although Pokémon battles are definitely unethical in our world it's important to remember that although the Pokémon world is based on ours it isn't our world, PETA seem to ignore the fact that Pokémon games, anime and manga care, friendship and respect are essential to being a successful trainer you can't be both a tyrant and league champion
Hey Toby! Wonderful New York/Unova centric videos lately - this one definitely included! Sad to see you going soon, but loving the content l, as always!
aww thnak you :D
This all makes a pretty good point. Plus...especially in the newer games where your starter pokemon put on a little show and basically beg to be chosen it seems....weird to think its akin to slavery. Because like...they could just....leave but they dont...they clearly *want* to be with you. And legendaries in later gens say theyre "testing" you. Basically...I like your analysis
in the case of the pokeball in the recent series we actually get to see inside the luxury ball and it's basically a pokemon penthouse. as for peta team plasma is s probably a peta espy. the whole group is just a bunch of pet murderers and kidnappers. they don't look after or free pets and they certainly don't bother investigating. and honestly with the whole thing with sinnoh folk tales japanese version it's very clear pokemon and humans are equals and have to potential to fall in love with each other. sans a language barrier. pokeballs aren't cages so i thinks it's wrong to think of them as such they are closer to mobile homes.
there seems to be three tests a trainer needs to pass, to "catch a pokemon" the athletic (ie being able to corner the pokemon), second test is a test of strength are the trainer's pokemon strong enough to be make it clear it's worth it to be trained by the human, and third is the accommodations.
how do you even work up the confidence to film on location like this. like the middle of the desert is fair enough, but those ferries midday are packed and you're just there talking about pokemon into a camera.
awh ahah thnaks, we tried to find a quiet spot
Imagine pokemon you just you caught has family waiting at home..
This feels like such a classic Toby video. Love hearing your thoughts on pokemon always ❤
Interesting addition to this, we see an elderly Treecko, so age is not tied to evolution, and we know that Pokemon owned by trainers have higher stats. Thus, a Pokemon that is owned by a trainer is probably more likely to be healthier, stronger, able to attract mates, and able to survive longer to pass down its genes to more offspring in-universe, showing a clear advantage to having a trainer.
in gen 5, N addresses this perfectly, I believe what N believes, if you’re a trainer, be like Ash, and if not, you are undeserving of Pokémon’s beauty
In pokemon Legends Arceus they explain why people have to catch and train pokemon . Arceus specifically asks you to catch every pokemon in the game before It can give you a piece of itself. You need pokemon as bodyguards to survive in that world. Pokemon will attack and kill people if they dont have pokemon. Maybe , over the time, pokemon learned that humans werent easy prey and dont attack people as often. But if people stopped catching and training pokemon, pokemon would likely attack as often they do in pokemon legends arceus.
Interesting parallels to how Digimon views Human and Digimon partnerships. Where the emotional bonds between the two is what allows a Digimon to evolve a lot quicker than if they never had a human partner.
I'm glad you covered this! Black and White was a bit lacking when it came to really explaining why Pokemon training is okay. I've always wanted someone to cover the nature of Pokemon as magical fighters that need to battle to grow.
Pokemon complicates things when it regularly draws comparisons to pets and other animals. Even though wild Pokemon fight in the games, when we look at them like pets, we start to ask questions, usually ending on the ethics of pet ownership, and that's a whole different issue.
Once we take the pet issue out of the equation, the franchise really hits us over the face with the fact that Pokemon and humans work together to reach their full potential. Pokemon are magical monsters that need to win fights to grow, the literal mechanics of the game.
When you get a little further into it, the Shinto inspiration for Pokemon means that they are magical creatures that manifest as representations of animals, objects, creatures, even people. So to bring it back around, it isn't that Pokemon are pets, it's that Pokemon like Meowth or Lillipup are the representation of pets, and probably live like a cat or dog would. The difference being, they are Pokemon at their core, and fighting is part of how they grow.
It's also just literally what they need to be for the franchise to make money, but that's besides the point. 😆
Another way to look at the term "master" is in the context of a master/servant relationship. Yes, the origins of master or mistress as a term here do go back to the master/slave dynamic, but it does take on a new aspect. Employment. The boss/employee relationship. Not a perfect analogy, for sure, and there are definitely abusive bosses and employees who have little to no choice but to keep working a terrible job. But that's the real world we're talking about. In an ideal world any employee, any servant, is only in such a relationship because they want to be. Pay is good, benefits are good, they like their boss, that kind of thing. And if the boss or master fails to provide sufficiently, then before long all their staff has quit and moved onto better jobs.
But, more to the points addressed in this video, I completely agree. The master ball is likely immoral or at the very least more of a moral gray area than other balls. Similarly, groups like Team Rocket or pokemon poachers who use things like cages and traps to catch pokemon are consistently depicted as being immoral (as locking a pokemon in a cage doesn't provide the same option for escape that a pokeball does). This could also be why shops only sell improved balls like the ultra ball to trainers who have earned enough gym badges. They've proven themselves responsible trainers who can be trusted not to abuse pokemon (at least in theory). This could mean that actually the increased catch rate for ultra balls and the reason that they look different is actually not because of any mechanics of the balls, but just that even wild pokemon have come to realize that being able to obtain ultra balls means that they are a better and more worthy trainer. They are simply more likely to agree to stay in an ultra ball because they understand the status of a trainer using one. That's probably not the case, but it's not completely out there either.
One last thing to consider is the fact that different pokemon would likely have different understanding of what it means to have and work with a trainer. A caterpie might only understand that "person helps with evolution", while an Alakazam is supposed to be far smarter than any human. Whatever reasoning an Alakazam might have to be with a trainer, they likely understand what that relationship means far better than their trainer does. If pokemon like Alakazam and Metagross are willingly with trainers and agreeing to battle, then it's probably a decent enough practice (in general, keeping in mind there are plenty of exceptions).
Also yes, none of this applies to our world, and certainly not to irl animals.
I think it depends on what kindnof trainer they are. Ash has a close realationship with his pokemon and they are his partners. They grow together. Paul was completly different. The kind of trainer he was is wrong.
Notification gang, where ya at?
You know they say if you can look yourself in the Reveal mirror and what you have done well that is your ethics.
*Lusallie has Nebby in the bag later teleport from a frozen room to sleep in Lusamine comfy luxury bed wearing a Z-Ring and Sync Stone*
I am a master, I love my pokemon they get strong, love and help protected. It’s bit of symbiosis…
*She has sinster grim, dreaming of being motherbeast*
The thing I've always found funny in these discussions is that Pokemon aren't animals, they're Kami. It genuinely isn't like animals, even if some Pokemon are depicted to have pet-like relationships, they're still far more intelligent and are shown to understand human speech very clearly. This on top of the fact that we've seen Pokemon leave abusive people implies it's much more of a mutual benefit of reasonable equals as opposed to one in dominance of the other. People get the strength, abilities, and social status of raising Pokemon, and Pokemon get things like opposable thumbs and controlled settings to improve their skills and abilities.
One thing that bugged me about Pokemon as a kid was how you couldn't catch them when they fainted, but it makes more sense to me now. With Pokemon wanting Trainers worthy of working with them it makes sense that they wouldn't want a Trainer who can only spam their strongest attacks until they beat down the opponent. Instead they'd want one who knows how to hold back and plan ahead to get them as close to 1HP as possible, but not over it. It shows more strategy and mastery of the battle.
Thinking of it that way makes the Master Ball a more devious weapon. It destroys the "choice" on the part of the Pokemon and forces them to follow a Trainer who has not only shown a willingness to take a short cut to power, but doesn't respect the Pokemon's right to choose its own Trainer. Even restarting the game after an accidental knockout or running out of Pokeballs shows a willingness to improve, but the Master Ball is an impatient copout designed to bypass a lack of skill (at least that's how I think the Pokemon would see it).
I mean, pokemon fight in the wild all the time. Is catching and battling pokemon truly so bad? But, some people don't battle with the pokemon they have. Some people just play with their pokemon.
i like head cannon Pokémon "eating" each other is just them battling and "eating" the exp energy. Mabey Pokémon gain energy both from food and battling.
also i think the entry's on megas and Paine may be from bad bonds like in the anime the Pokémon not being able to controlee the energy and thus that energy hurts them
Pokemon is fictional. Therefore, the morality of the world is totally fictional.
In the Pokemon world, is it morally okay to catch Pokemon and battle with them? Yes.
Hm, fascinating topic, i like this Video.
Though, i wonder, is that line from the First Movie, really something worth taking into account, especially if anything like it hasn’t been mentioned since?
concerning pokemon fighting naturally in the wild, that's true of real animals too. but just because a lion and a tiger would fight each other if they somehow met in the wild, it doesn't make it okay to pit captive ones against each other, surely?
THEORY: ETERNATUS is a Scarlet and Violet Legendary too! Color is scarlet a violet. Deals with warping time.
Toby hopped aboard the S.S. Royal Unova.
To add to this, a Pokémon can't be everywhere at once. In battle not only does the human trainer act as an extra set of eyes, they also act as a source of strategy. In a great deal of the games, a Pokémon will just use moves randomly. You either need enough IQ in the Pokémon mystery dungeon series or good enough trainer AI to do things like always using super effective moves.
The thumbnail says "cathcing" not catching 😂
Catching Pokémon is perfectly fine. But don't you dare even think about cathcing any!
I think part of the reason pokemon accept trainers is infinity energy is passed from the trainer like with mega evolution, zmoves, ash greninja as a specific example but throughout the battle/ there is also the strategist element they can focus on maximum output while another body focuses on planning, though that doesn't make since for some like alakazam without the infinity energy link // I think they made mega evolution painful just so people wouldn't curb stomp rattattas as often
plus being captured is also like a garuntee of easy meals for them, compared to having to source their own food which wouldn't always be the easiest and may involve more battling
YOU MISSPELLED CATCHING 😭😭😭😭 LMAO
from the prespective of our world i say it would be ,oral since batteling is one of the best ways to gain freindship
Let's not forget breeding. Trainers want specific traits from their Pokemon; be it good stats, a certain nature, or the shiny variant. All of these factors contribute to the desirability of the species as a whole. The Pokemon that don't have the traits we want are either released back into the wild or traded to another trainer. This helps to ensure that the Pokemon can persist. Like how Lapras and Farfetch'd were nearly extinct, now their populations are booming. And fossil Pokemon are even starting to make a comeback.
I can see how in some instances, in some cases with certain people, catching Pokémon is wrong, as in against their will. The legends in the games make a good example, especially those who help the player character bring peace such as with Sword and Shield and Scarlet and Violet. In those times when you are catching the legendary, it is clear they want to travel with the player character but, before that can happen, the legendary Pokémon will test the trainer with a battle. If they can win, then they are worthy. In this case, when the Pokémon clearly wants to travel with the player character, the Master Ball is wrong in the sense that you are cheating in a test.
The latest DLC for Scarlet and Violet is a great example. During the ending battle, you cannot catch your opponent. You have to actually defeat it and then you are given the option to catch it. And I would honestly love it if this is how legends are presented from here on, forcing the player to actually pass the legend's test to prove they are worthy of having such a powerful partner. Plus, this feature pretty much guarantees that if you want the legendary, you can get it without using a Master Ball or getting lucky. You just have to defeat it and it's yours if you want it.
I don't know. Just seems to be more ... right for me.
Mega evolution was achieved by Rayquaza without a trainer and Mewtwo in the anime with Red
It's a possibility that the pokémon get a greater level of power _overall_, as wild pokemon don't get EVs, and can't use the battle gimmicks (excepting Terastalization) without human assistance; wild dynamax pokemon tend to go on rampages, outside of the apparently underground and contained environment of the Dens.
In my opinion, humans are massive Aura batteries, which the majority of humans can't use. Thus, bonding with a pokémon allows the pokémon to draw on that well of power. It's what the games are talking about when they talk about the bond between trainer and pokémon, and greater friendship allows the pokémon to draw on (or means the trainer's getting used to the pokémon drawing on) that power.
Not all Pokémon in the anima want to evolve. Ash's Pickachu and Bulbasaur didn't want to evolve. The wanted to prove that a Pokemon needed to evolve to be strong, sharing their energy with their trainer. Even Dawn's Piplup didn't want to evolve.
Domestication's a hell of a misunderstood thing. Cats, dogs, horses, and so on have all learned that they can trust certain individuals to provide food, water, and care for their needs. Humans often utilize these animals for something they're good at, like catching mice, helping hunt, or moving things. As long as you don't abuse this exchange, animals often don't mind being near you. As such, it's similar with Pokemon. A PokeBall is essentially a pet carrier/horse trailer with a twist. But at the end of the day, it's the relationship that matters most. If you're not fostering a good relationship with your Pokemon, you shouldn't be a trainer.
Now as and aside, we are supposed to "Catch 'em All", but that's because we originally would play as something of a research assistant for the games' Professors, collecting data on Pokemon via the PokeDex. This morphed over time. Think about it. In RBY, you wouldn't even have to go against Brock if not for one REALLLY insistent person blocking you from leaving Pewter City. And you later learn that HMs need Badges to work, so you actually HAVE TO DO THE GYMS TO MOVE FORWARD. Not to mention that Cerulean Cave only opens up to you after you become the Champion, meaning you must become the Champion to catch number 150. And that's just Gen 1. Later Gens eventually move away from you assisting the Professor as much, with more of an emphasis on the Trials and Gyms.
I don't think proper Mega evolutions actually hurt them. The problem is twofold, first, the only lore and examples of these awful side effects of Megas only come from Rotomdex, who is not the most reliable source. Context is also important. Afaik, mega evolution was a relatively new thing to Alolans, and since the PC's megas all need a maxed bond to evolve, Rotomdex has to be collecting the rampage/pain data from Trainers who are using it incorrectly, or inefficiently, or secondhand accounts of said rampages.
In the anime, we do see an example of both, with the same Pokemon. Korrina's Lucario went berserk for a while upon mega evolving, but what happened once its bond was closer? Less rage, probably less pain, more control, etc.
I think the whole point is that one needs to be experienced enough to control literally Infinite Energy before attempting a mega evolution. Otherwise it can go catastrophically badly.
I see them as Pocket Monsters. They are strong creatures that like to battle. I think the lines become more fuzzier when Pokemon are perceived as friendly pets.
This topic is always a rather interesting one to explore but I love ur analysis here. Great editing and quality as always and I do believe catching Pokémon is fine in the canon universe. Whether it’s the games or anime, if people and Pokémon are working together then it creates a better world
maybe instead of Mega Evolution
you could say "special evolution"
through items, trades or other specific methods
a way to evolve that is just impossible in the wild
Anyone else remember the Meowth that had boots on and was traumatized due to being badly injured by a Persian, then almost kills another trainer's Persian due to that very trauma? Yeah, that's not the correct battle style
i think it's a shame not to mention the rival of the diamond and pearl anime, paul, in this discussion. he's an example of a moral grey area in this debate to me. he treats his pokemon poorly, and some of them are unhappy. but...they CAN leave at any time, he says as much. he's not enslaving them. as a matter of fact, he actually likes his electivire, and electivire seems perfectly happy with his style/training philosophy.
is paul wrong, do you think? by what empirical measures could one determine a pokemon's happiness, and whether or not keeping them is moral?
High level Pokémon acquired via trade to a trainer with a few gym badges will not obey the trainer. This implies they have free will and choose who they will allow to direct them.
But thats only if you are considering the anime, the manga shows the more dangerous side of owning one of those monsters and how weaponising it can upset everything. All the evil teams in game and anime seem mire tamed compared to the manga universe.
Just like free will and determinism battle in the present to see which controls it. If the reason for battle isnt love then it isnt good.
Yk I kinda see it as the pokemon enjoy being in the balls its like a constant pleasurable experience and they know the trainers care about their health
I'm not sure you're right, even from a lore point of view.
Why Pokemon that are treated badly don't break their PokeBall? For exemple shadow pokémons, or those that are used by evil organisation that raise them in clearly unethical ways (see, for exemple, the whips used by team rocket in gen 1).
Then, why would so many people in the pokemon world, especially members of the Diamond and Pearl clan oppose pokeball on an ethical basis ?
Why does N say to us that "we are different" because our pokemon actually want to fight alongside us ?
What about pokemon trainers that do not engage in battle, is it still ethical?
Why do fully evolved Pokemon stay with their Master?
Is the fitness of the pokemon really increased it the pokemon cannot reproduce?
I don't think this theory holds.
We are *taming* wild Pokemon. We are not just cooperating. This was the case before PokeBall like technologies maybe, and still in some instances despite the use of pokeball, but it is clearly not a generalization we can make.
If you are interested in ethical cooperation between wild animals and humans there's multiple exemple by the way ! (Great Indicator with the Hadza people, dolphins in Brazil, in the Irdidawe river, historicaly with orcas in Australia, etc.)
But those are different from symbiosis and mutualistic relationship that can, sometimes, be unethical (for exemple : even though we increase chicken fitness with industrial farming, making it a mutualistic relationship in evolutionary terms, it is stil highly unethical).
If Pokemon could really escape PokeBall and PC anytime, and if they are indeed smart enough not to be deceived by humans (likely given their suggested cognitive abilities), then why not.
But at the moment, like the capture and the breeding of wild and domestic animals in our world, it appears that the Pokemon/human relationship in Pokemon training is one of domination and exploitation. We can frame it as a hierarchical relationship: humans have more power in the relationship and thus are able to exploit or abuse the Pokemon if they want to. Like any such power dynamic it is unethical on the ground that one party has all the power and is structurally likely to abuse the other party.
Am I supposed to join team plasma now ? Or maybe the Rangers of Almia ?
Great video by the way!
I've yet to watch the video, but I wanna dispute whether the chicken example is an instance of a mutualistic relationship, as I'm of the view that e.g. factory farming disproportionately harms them above and beyond incidental benefits they might be conferred such that I think it probably is best characterised as a parasitic relationship (in favour of humans, it needn't be said). Though perhaps I'm injecting a non-evolutionary conception of forms of symbiosis here; guess I oughta ask, would the mere fact it ensures progeny be sufficient to qualify as a mutualistic relation on an evolutionary front?
Anywho as an aside I'm basically of the view that the standardised practice of Pokémon capture is messed-up when you think about it-the cockfighting analogy holds-and I think (unpopular opinion) their stories are at their most flimsy when they try to persuade people to the contrary e.g. in Black & White 1. The stories work best when not too much attention is paid to the central conceit as it doesn't bear much scrutiny.
@@incrediblyaverage7177 yeah in biology we tend to definie the interaction between two individuals by how it affect their "fitness".
Fitness is basically "how much you spread your genes", so it can be by helping those who share the same genes as you (close family, children, 75% genetically identical ants in a colony) or simply by reproducing (or spreading your genes through horizontal transfers if you're a bacteria with plasmids).
Based on this criteria we have: Competition (- and -), Antagonism (- and +), Amensalism (- and 0), Neutralism (0 and 0), Commensalism (0 and +) and Mutualism (+ and +).
So from and evolutionary point of view industrial production of chicken is, in fact, quite mutualistic. We gain from it (sweet proteins to survive and reproduce) and they get an absurd boost in reproduction.
Whereas symbiosis is a less clearly defined for me (maybe I'm just ignorant). It's basically two individuals of different species that have (or... Sometimes it's optional) to have a certain relationship. Think parasitism and endosymbiosis (organisms that becomes part of another organism), etc. Usually it's beneficial I think (like mutualism, but it can last longer/be more systematic).
But those are ecological and evolutionary concepts, they are descriptive and do not assume any kind of ethics/moral. And we should probably not use only this criterion when considering moral relations between species.
I think we should also look at "proximal" benefits for the individual (not his gene pool, not in evolutionary time), and include something like freedom of association.
@@soencoda754
Yeah to be clear re: symbiosis I was deliberately using 'symbiosis' as an umbrella term to contain relations like mutualism, commensualism, parasitism, amensalism and synnecrosis between species.
Anyhow I agree that exclusively invoking the specifically evolutionary/fitness conception of these things is probably inappropriate when looking at the acceptability of practices, and I think it's likely contrary to the broader more everyday (sociological?) sense of these notions where it's indeed more focused on proximal benefits, in your terms.
Cause otherwise you'd get absurdities like concluding human breeding farms in dystopian fiction actually being a boon to the meatbags.
Idk I mean these creatures we call Pokémon seem to have there own will and personality traits closer to that of humans so the idea that these Pokémon want to battle and to fight not that they are forced to maybe in the games it might seem that way but watching the anime watching how a Pokémon can be more into the fight than the trainer and even possibly wanting to fight idk but it seems more like Pokémon want to fight and aren’t forced to
Something I don’t see btogt up when this comes up in conversation is meowith from the show he learned to speak and even even walk on his back legs with no help and he could be a trainer if mewto had his clonnes meowith could have at least a couple rattstas
And probably some stray cats maybe a couple others maybe some others ekas coffing maybe chatot look if a cat has enough intelligence to talk and could have Pokémon the ones who read minds don’t really make me think humans offer a lot hell in the case orrangov from sun & moon they have Pokémon or some do but people own them I reas\\t my case
Pokemon black and blue ? 🤣
It's possible that team Team Plasma was Game Freak's answer to PETA
Great video!
Well it depends like dogs are used for a lot of different jobs and they actually enjoy it and have the ability to go into work mode. I wouldn’t say it’s not ethical as they work with their human. And they could easily also just leave but they don’t. Plus dogs evolved next to humans and I could see the same thing with Pokémon also evolving next to humans. And in our world yea it’s wrong for us to force them to fight but we also see this in the wild with all kinds of animals they fight each other for leadership. I don’t think there is one simple answer to this question as ethics and morality definitely depends on the point of view of that culture.
based on some of the pokedex descriptions, catching pokemon is one of the reasons humans still exist in that world
Is catching Pokemon ethical? It is if the pokemon isn’t being caught against their will
Is Pokemon battles ethical? Traditional Pokemon Battles in the Pokemon world is considered a sport, so asking if Pokemon battles ethical is like asking if boxing in our world is ethical. Of course there are situations where Pokemon’s powers are used to achieve a greater goal (May that goal be noble or malicious) where there are no rules and it’s battling until one side is physically unable to resist the other
This is a game where magical creatures roam. I’m all for the fair treatment of animals but a lot of times, PETA and animal rights groups take it why too far. There’s was a Vietnamese shop that was close down in my city because of an animal activist video that went viral claiming that a dog was being abused and was going to be killed and used in dishes that was served at the restaurant. Comes to find out, the dog did not belong to the restaurant but the house next to it and when the SPCA came out to check on the dog, they said that the dog looked like it was taken care of. The restaurant gotten so many threats through phone calls and everyone went online and rated the business a one star to the point were the restaurant closed it doors.
Legend Arceus answered this question. Catching pokemon is the right thing to do and N is wrong.
I personally think if you want to get moral about Pokémon, then making a genetically altered Pokémon such as mewtwo was wrong. Mewtwo's birth and life was full of suffering, it should never exist. I also think the master ball should be used too save a legendary Pokémon from a evil organization such as team rocket.
A big problem with the idea of pokemon in the real world being society in general would be completely different in many regards if it was like the pokemon world and they have always been around and acted as they do then probably would be OK as you sed a pokemon can communicate give promotion ect which completely changes things the reason say dogfighting is horrible and wrong is because an anamal has a lesser form of sentience and can't give permission or state that something is wrong where as boxing or other martial arts are perfectly fine because we can state we want to do this so pokemon would probably fall under the same kind of situation although if pokemon just appeared out of nowhere with the strength and abilitys they have if we didn't get into a situation of working together we would be wiped out or at least not be able to settle in towns and cities we would probably be reduced to a more nomadic situation living much more separately constantly on the move baced on the threat at the time
Well we can awnser this in a more simple way. Is it wrong to own an pet?
Honest inquiry: Do our pets love us or do they have Stockholm Syndrome?
This got more interesting than I thought 😅
YES. THANK YOU. *POKEMON ARE NOT ANIMALS.* the thing about pokemon is that they are kind of violent by nature: most species will readily fight each other (or even humans once upon a time) and have magical power FOR the purpose of fighting each other (you don't breath fire or shoot lightning from the sky without it being designed for fighting) and the very fact that pokemon evolve at all is proof that fighting is just what pokemon do and pokemon WANT to get stronger. also some pokemon are WAY smarter than humans so if catching and battling pokemon were bad then i'm pretty sure it wouldn't take much for these ultra-smart pokemon to say something about it. pokemon are basically their own race of beings and they typically want to be with humans.
But then why are the Ultra Beasts ok with being caught and bonding with humans?
It could be that this like the Master bal might be an odd imaoral issue. Unsure
True, though I would like to point out they do bond like regular Pokemon after a while, my Kartana's got max friendship with me I love them. From interacting with the UBs in the game I've come to the conclusion that because they are alien, there is a lot about them, that we definitely don't know. As Nihiligo feeds on other lifeforms yet to my knowledge no other lifeforms we know of are native to its natural habitat so I'm assuming that there is something we don't know about that's either its prey or it's a symbiote too. Thanks for responding to me. I love your videos. I wish you well! @@BirdKeeperToby
i notice you keep changing the title card lol
I was rinning an AB test with multiple thumbnails. Its a feature in beta atm
@@BirdKeeperToby yeah i just learned that feature a few days ago after i made my comment. i see a few youtubers do it as well
Pokemon are as ethical as taming in ARK, and carnism in real life.
Pokemon aren't actually magic thats just what they thought in the old days also arceus isnt god i checked the bulbapidea and there was a page that said they where feared and because gods in there own rights let me translate they where so feared they where mistaken for gods but that same page said some believe GOD made pokemon on day 7
What do you mean ethical? No it’s not wrong, your befriending it. That was many years ago. No it’s not violent, it’s for kids. And to defend themselves. They don’t die, they faint. POKÉMON Are real, you have been in POKÉMON and use your imagination, imagination comes to life. Not through normal circumstances. for businesses and as a pet. They gain a friend. Remember not all POKÉMON are the same. They steal the pokeball. And to stop people from stealing your POKÉMON.
catching pokemon is fine for the most part. There are bad trainers/humans in the games but most people in the games are generally good. Never liked Peta to be honest. They had controversaries in the past and come across aggressive and insufferable.
I ABSOLUTELY disagree. We know Poké Balls (and many other human creations) are powered by Pokémon Life Force. And Pokémon Life Force can only be obtained by draining it from Pokémon via an extremely painful process that can kill the Pokémon if taken too far. The Pokémon society as a whole is based on the suffering of Pokémon, even if most trainers aren't aware of it.
So whether or not you're right about the human/Pokémon relationship being healthy, the fact that Poké Balls exist is morally wrong, and they shouldn't be used.
But I do think the human/Pokémon relationships are not healthy anyway. At least in the games (the anime is not the same canon), you have these Pokémon that attack you, and try to escape when you try to catch them. But when you catch them they suddenly become your friends.
Poké Balls turn Pokémon docile. They can still disobey you, but they won't try to attack you. And you can take them away from their homes and families if you desire. Pokémon are as smart as humans, if not more, but humans don't treat them as equals like they used to in the distant past, when Poké Balls didn't exist.
And even if you release them, I think it's already too late. They're still more docile than they used to be, and the Poké Balls' effect is irreversible. I think that, since the creation of Poké Balls, released docile Pokémon would breed with wild Pokémon, creating a slightly more docile offspring.
And doing that over hundreds of years would create the more docile wild Pokémon that rarely attack humans of current day, unlike they did in Legends Arceus. I do admit that this part is more of a headcanon than the other parts though.
So basically, Poké Balls are awful in every way. They are horrible and shouldn't exist, but humans as a whole are an egoistic species and they don't care about what is right. Only they're own interest matters, and outside of Poké Balls, creatures like Mewtwo, Genest or Type:Null and the existence of things like Mega Evolution, Z-moves and Dynamax are proof of that.
Team Plasma was onto something. Releasing your Pokémon is not the right thing to do. Sure the Pokémon turned docile because of Poké Balls, and the basis of the humans and Pokémon's relationship is a lie.
However, the feelings between docile Pokémon and humans is still real. They may be docile, but they still have feelings. And the bond that developed between a caught Pokémon and a human is real and mustn't be destroyed, even if the basis is a lie.
What they should do is stop the production and use of Poké Balls entirely, but not release the Pokémon that were already caught. They should encourage the trainers to truly befriend wild Pokémon. We've seen several times that it's possible.
As time would pass, caught Pokémon would pass away, and there wouldn't be any caught Pokémon left, for a new era of healthy relationships between humans and Pokémon.
Sadly Game Freak will never ever admit openly that Poké Balls are awful and allow us to fight their use since they're part of the games' main gameplay.
How is this relate to Pokémon use physical attack like cross chop and body plan and tackle
I prefer not to focus on ‘ethics’
Meh, Peta asks this question in bad faith, they themselves are a greedy organization that operates pretty much like Ghetsis does.
Great video btw, going out with banger after banger :3
First comment
I love Pokémon Cathcing kinda hype (see thumbnail)