Kant: Non-Consequentialist Gameplay

Immanual Kant is one of the most influential of all philosophers. He is also famous for being one of the hardest to read and incredibly convoluted. However he set the ethical standards which we still hold strong in many cases. Kant was a deontologist, one who believed all ethics were rooted in duty. This led him to being heavily against consequentialist thinkers such as the Utilitarians in England. I want to take a view of non-consequentialist gameplay.

First I believe I should state what I mean by "non-consequentialist gameplay." Quite simply this idea is to not view units and actions as means to an end, but the actual action as an end to itself. What makes a non-Consequentialist player different from a consequentialist one? Quite simply a non-consequentialist takes the actions that they take into more consideration than the result of those actions. A consequentialist would say, "I am going to have unit X, charge unit Y, in order to hold it off for a turn so Unit Z can join in and kill then next turn." A non-consequentialist would disagree, he would take each move on an individual basis and not try to waste energy, he will hide when it seems hiding is appropriate, attack when attacking is appropriate. He will worry about the effects of his actions when it is time to take action again, but not before. That does not mean he completely ignores the possibilities inherent in his actions, but views them as that one of a myriad of possibilities that are acceptable so long as he makes a reasonable choice.

It is hard to say if I support this type of strategy or not. It may seem nebulous but it really affects standard as to which we play. A consequentialist army will likely have a number of throwaway units and position itself to take advantages of openings it will try to create with these units. A non-consequentialist list will generally have a large number of well rounded units, all of which can perform multiple roles individually, and the player will play each unit as an individual with a loose overall strategy.