American Hearts
Being the PC in Your Game of Life
When you play a video game with moral choices, what do you choices do you make?
What do your choices in video games say? Well, that’s still a developing area of psychological research. What we do know is that video games CAN help develop empathy -
Last August, researchers at the University of Wisconsin–Madison developed their own game called Crystals of Kaydor to study whether video games could boost empathy in middle-schoolers. Over a two-week period, students were broken into groups, one of which played Crystals and another which played the commercially available action RPG Bastion from Supergiant Games. The findings of the study suggested that a game designed to “increase empathic accuracy,” such as Crystals, produces “behaviorally-relevant, functional neural changes in fewer than 6 hours of gameplay in adolescents.
Empathy is a really hard row to hoe. It’s on decline, at least in the US. But it’s also a notoriously hard thing to pin down. People can be very capable of situational empathy and believe that they are an empathetic person. People can feel empathy for others in situations they are familiar with.
Empathy can also create traps for self-styled empaths. Empathy without accountability is enabling. And accountability is one thing Americans tend to agree on, at least in others. This is anecdotal, mostly because I didn’t research it and maybe I should have, but I find most Americans seem to agree that people who do something WRONG deserve to be held accountable.
Now, where the violation comes from and how we mete justice is a hotly debated topic. Throughout human history. In the US, that topic has been overwhelmingly racist. There’s a lot to dig into here, how we view other people. How we handle transgressions. What the path forward is for our social networks, our communities, our society and our governments.
While I intend to dig into that over the next year, there’s another phenomenon that I’d like to address a little today. Main Character Syndrome (MCS). This is mostly just a pop-psychology term. Narcissists are nothing new. They rarely die by the side of the water. It is difficult for any of us to separate ourselves from our stories, because we are the main characters of our lives. It’s easily identified in the “Karens” of the world.
Social media distorts your perception of reality too. People have access to technology that has allowed them to create a version of themselves that is idealized. The version of their life that they want everyone to see. It’s easier than ever to obfuscate the privilege, the hard work, the networking and all the facets that go into success in the digital era.
It’s easier to grift than ever with less repercussions. Trump is the easiest success story to target, and he’s not the first politician to grift their way into office. And celebrities have historically engaged in less scrupulous behavior for money. These aren’t new stories. Just more invasive than ever before. And it isn’t just someone knocking on your door to sell you dull blades or a mediocre vacuum anymore.
We read chosen one literature. We play chosen one video games. The New Testament is just a giant chosen one religion. We see people in reality TV or on TikTok with their perfect life and we want it too. People who had their big break from working class backgrounds. And those stories do happen, but most people that are overnight sensations either worked very hard for a very long time or they have serious financial backing.
Those same tools that are used to sell you a life story are at your disposal and they are easier than ever to use. You can make yourself look younger with filters. You can create fake vacations. There are legions of people dedicated to calling other people out on their lies. Social media quickly became a way for people to compare themselves to others and it can wreak havoc on people with self-esteem issues.
I have a lot of friends who have deactivated platforms to the betterment of their mental health. I’ve considered it myself. I get too much social interaction with people all over the world to truly divorce myself of these tools. Still, I see a number of trends across many different social circles. People are fiercely protective of an image to the point that they divorce themselves from reality.
They are “good people” so they never do anything wrong. They hate situations that don’t cater to them, no matter how many other people are trying to do that activity. Opinions about everything, regardless of their involvement or education on the issue. Vital characters in everyone else’s journey. Personal litmus tests. Hard lines in the sand.
Take a second, if you’re reading along, to think of the interactions you’ve had in your life and how many people you remember actually having a lasting impact on you. On your worldview. People you remember doing something embarrassing or times you’ve embarrassed yourself. There are times and people that are particularly notable. Even for some of the most memorable moments of my life, I only remember a few events and even less of the actual people involved.
My wife introduced me to the concept of a circle of tragedy somewhere along our journey and it’s something I’ve taken to heart. In the circle of tragedy, there is a traumatic event at the center. The closer you are to the tragedy, the more freedom you have to process. If you’re further away from the issue, your role is to listen. Vent outward, vent upward.
I’ve applied this to my management style - always vent parallel or upward, never downward. I’ve applied it to my understanding of sociopolitical events. It’s helped me be supportive of friends who are oppressed or experiencing cultural targeting. Sometimes, a history lesson isn’t what a person needs.
I also apply it to myself when it comes to main character syndrome. A lot of what I write here has been deeply personal and political. There are still real people on the other side of my stories. Sometimes it is harmless, if a little silly. “And everyone applauded at the end.” Sometimes my trauma is someone else’s more serious trauma. Even if it was deeply traumatic for myself.
It has also helped me reshape my thought process on how I engage in public discourse. Even if I am the main character in my story, I’m just a side character in almost EVERY other person in my life’s story. Am I trying to make this about me when it isn’t? I’m grateful that people want to be a part of my story and let me be a part of theirs. I must remain respectful of that process. It shapes what and how I write vs the things I will say in a group setting vs the things I will say to my wife in private.
Beyond that, if someone is telling me about their experience with sexism, that’s their experience. If someone is telling me about how they have encountered racism, that’s their story not mine. Anecdotes lead to data that becomes scientific research.
One thing I’ve learned, for my personal philosophy if nothing else, is that understanding what lead a person to a decision is often more important than the decision they’ve made. We often focus on the result and ignore the process. The ends. The destination.
In my conversation with Dolores, they mentioned one of the differences between how left and right ideologies address trauma. Progressive ideology tends to confront trauma while the right weaponizes it. And, MCS is definitely a trauma response. It derails political work. Community organization. It allows for false narratives. The right weaponizes it great effect (see the lone wolves and alpha males proudly displaying their social trauma, often in deadly results).
It wears on your sense of self-worth. Success matters. Other people are better than me. It creates competition instead of collaboration. Drives wedges in common goals. Makes litmus tests out of learning opportunities. It attacks the foundation of progressive ideology.
Life in our society is a traumatic event for a lot of reasons. If we apply a circle of tragedy, empathy with accountability and do the work to understand HOW people got where they are and address those issues instead of an action that has already happened, maybe we start to have a path forward to a better place for everyone instead of one for us.
Those good choices you make in video games, who do they usually benefit? You or someone else? And if you can make that choice there, why can’t you make it here?