Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games

Author1 Name (William Bill Guschwan) Affiliation: Columbia College Chicago,

wguschwan@colum.edu
Author2 Name (Janell Baxter) Affiliation: Columbia College Chicago, jbaxter@colum.edu
Author3 Name (Thomas Seager) Affiliation: Arizona State University, thomas.seager@asu.edu
Author4 Name (Susan Spierre Clark) Affiliation: Arizona State University,
susan.spierre@asu.edu
Abstract. Certain wicked problems are categorized by obstacles that make them especially
problematic. They may exist outside the direct human sensory experience, manifest over long
time periods, engage communities on a global scale with diverse values sets, or require
cooperative solutions. These types of problems are resistant to resolution, and may reveal
additional problems. Instead of trying to resolve them in a traditional analytical style, a new
approach is needed.
We propose a framework to address these problems called Gamiformics; an approach that
posits these types of problems as ontological, not epistemological. Certain difficulties in moral
learning are a side effect of the ontological commitment of a subject/object non-systems view.
Instead of viewing a person as an object, a systems-based view of a person-in-a-situation is
used.
Gamiformics is a framework that uses a systems-based view of a person-in-a-situation, gamelike experiences, and non-cooperative game theory to simulate classic moral problems and
make explicit social interaction and influence. Games such as Pisces position person and
situation as negotiable, and can be analyzed with this new ontology.

Proceedings of the International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technologies (ISSN

2329-9169) is published annually by the Sustainable Conoscente Network. Jun-Ki Choi and
Annick Anctil, co-editors 2015. ISSSTNetwork@gmail.com.
Copyright 2015 by William Guschwan, Janell Baxter, Thomas Seager, Susan Spierre Clark.
Licensed under CC-BY 3.0.
Cite as:
Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games. Proc. ISSST,
William Guschwan, Janell Baxter, Thomas Seager, Susan Spierre Clark. Doi information v3
(2015)

Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games

Introduction. Certain wicked problems are categorized by obstacles that make them especially
problematic. They may exist outside the direct human sensory experience, manifest over long
time periods, engage communities on a global scale with diverse values sets, or require
cooperative solutions. These types of problems are resistant to resolution, and may reveal
additional problems. Instead of trying to resolve them in a traditional analytical style, a new
approach is needed.
We propose a framework to address these problems called Gamiformics; an approach that
posits these types of problems as ontological, not epistemological. Certain difficulties in moral
learning are a side effect of the ontological commitment of a subject/object non-systems view.
Instead of viewing a person as an object, a systems-based view of a person-in-a-situation is
used.
Why Games? Creating an appropriate environment and experience for this type of moral
learning can be challenging, however technological advances have resulted in the creation of
immersive settings that allow learning by doing. These types of experiences, with intuitive
interfaces, can provide a deeper connection with content. Using game-like experiences to
simulate problems can convincingly situate the student in a moral dilemma to explore classic
problems in moral philosophy, and non-cooperative game theory can make explicit the way that
we interact and influence others.
Goal-oriented games use an interactive experience to help players accomplish an objective.
Instead of affording the experience of achieving, socializing, rewards, or exploring with these
types of games, they are used in a more meaningful context. Games with a serious purpose use
gamification1 to afford a serious purpose; interactivity is a tool that can afford an experience as
opposed to a movie that tells a story. A goal driven game will foreground the formal declaration
of its purpose and provide structure for decision making allowing players to learn, experiment,
and practice in a way that is otherwise difficult to achieve.
Some designers, most prominently Jane McGonigal, have promoted games for social purposes.
McGonigal's analysis, however, works with the old Descartes subject/object split. Like
gamification it sounds promising, yet gamification has been shown to suffer in its long-term
effectiveness2.
Gamiformics. Gamiformics is a reaction to the gamification movement. By seeking to motivate
tasks with rewards, gamification is transforming many applications. It demonstrates many flaws
such as the initial interest in extrinsic rewards fades over time3. Gamiformics tries to fix that by
using an identity model based on individuation.
The award-winning game Journey4 uses a framework similar to Gamiformics. While the
designer Jenova Chen has his own style, the Gamiformics framework is useful for analyzing his
approach. Thus, Gamiformics is useful for critique of games as well as making them5.
Person in a Situation. A new ontology would work with a person in a situation as the
fundamental entity. Games are ideal for creating this new ontology as you construct both the
1

Gamification: the use of game mechanics in non-game contexts to engage and inspire action.
Zichermann, Gabe. 2011. "Gamification Has Issues, but They Aren't the Ones Everyone
Focuses on."
3
Juul, Jesper, April 2, 2011, Gamification Backlash Roundup, The Ludologist
4
http://thatgamecompany.com/games/journey
5
Parkin, Simon 2012 Jenova Chen: Journeyman, Eurogame.net
2

W. Guschwan et al.

situation and the person, both the roles and the rules. This is akin to Giambattista Vicos
foregrounding of poetry as the primary ontological split in that it is an identity and a context
which could be considered a relational ontology. Vico gave the postulate of the new science
(1725) a celebrated formulation (The true and the made are convertible). This means that
we can have rational knowledge only about that of which we are the cause, about that which we
ourselves have made.6
Identity. Gilbert Simondon proposes a model of identity as a process of individuation within
metastable environments7. What is individuation? Simondons most basic argument is that the
individual is never given in advance; it must be produced, it must coagulate, or come into
being, in the course of an ongoing process.8 As such, he promotes the importance of
emergence in the construction of identity. We propose to use this model of identity. In other
places, we refer to it as person in a situation.
Context. Another French philosopher, Andre Leroi-Gourhan, further emphasizes the role of tools
in constructing identity. By focusing on context as the tools a person uses, identity is
constructed in the moment of the use of the tool. And what he [Leroi-Gourhan] is able to then
show is that the history of technics and the history of the human being run parallel with one
another; they are, if not the same, at least inextricable.9 We propose that videogames are tools
that co-create the identity of the player.
Logic. Logic here is conceived as the general form of judgments investigated by such thinkers
as Immanuel Kant. Instead of a dual logic, we use a four-fold logic based on the tetralemma10.
This 4 fold logic depends on an ecological psychology view where assertions of it is, it is not,
it is both and it is neither occur co-dependently. Using an ecological psychological reading of
Aristotle, we are able to map this logic to Aristotles 4 causes11. The formal cause is the
cooperative focal point of the game. The material cause is the actual mechanics of the game
and the win state. The efficient cause is both of them occurring simultaneously, the event of the
game. This cause involves negotiation and networking about both the formal cooperative cause
and the more material notion of winning the game. And the final cause is the emergent selfknowledge that occurs through this play. Importantly, the order must be protected and is
asserted as a novel contribution to a framework for promoting sustainability learning.
Non-Cooperative Games. A series of non-cooperative games recently created reveal some of
the salient ethical quandaries relevant to sustainability. Each problem is adapted from
economics concepts such as the problem of environmental externalities, the Tragedy of the
Commons, weak vs. strong sustainability, and intergenerational equity. One novel aspect of
these modules is that they can be played simultaneously or sequentially by classes at multiple
universities, where the interaction between classes introduces an essential element of moral
tension; digital interfaces enable experiences that can represent real world sustainability
problems in which actions can impact others disconnected in space and time from decisionmakers. The classes deliberate about issues of fairness, procedural justice, moral luck, and the
responsibility of experts to society.
6

Dupuy, Jean-Pierre. 2013. The Artificialization of Life: Designing Self-Organization. Page 81.
Simondon, Gilbert. 1964. Lindividu et sa gense physico-biologique.
8
Shaviro, Steven. 2006. Simondon on Individuation The Pinocchio Theory.
9
Bluemink, Matt. 2015. Man, the Animal Without Essence, 3: Brains, Hands and Tools
10
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetralemma
11
Guschwan, William. 2014. Aristotles Fourfold Causality, Tetralemma, and Emergence, ETC: A
Review of General Semantics
7

Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games

Ultimately, these games allow players to confront two essential moral questions:
1. What are my responsibilities to others?
2. What am I willing to risk in my own well-being to meet these obligations?
The instructional theory supporting the games derives from Kolbs Learning Cycle 12, in which
Kolb theorizes that four activities are essential to effective learning: abstraction, experiment,
experience, and reflection. While traditional pedagogical approaches for teaching ethics
emphasize abstraction (through readings) and reflection (through discussion and writing), the
games are designed to complement these approaches by strengthening experiment and
experience. Consequently, the game-based pedagogy has moved ethics education from
predictable to surprising, passive to active, and apathetic to emotionally resonant.
These games represent a new genre in game design, predicated on non-cooperative game
theory problems that admit tragic outcomes. We believe that the interaction between players
that are inherent in a game-theoretic genre is both novel and especially well-suited to exploit
mobile social-networking platforms. Existing game titles (e.g., Farmville) currently take
advantage of only positive interactions between players on these platforms, whereas these
sustainability-oriented games explicitly confront tragic outcomes that result from a failure to work
collectively.
Bunnies.The Tragedy of the Commons is illustrated in a sequential game in which two to four
players collectively manage a vegetable garden. The game simulates the classic Lotka-Voltera
predator-prey equation and consequently helps players understand both population dynamics
and resilience in ecology and the problem of the Commons. The game is structured so that
failure (collapse of the garden and the bunny population) is inevitable as the game becomes
increasingly more difficult. The goal is to post a High Score, which requires both understanding
of the chaotic predator-prey dynamics and the cooperation of other players.
Miner Madness. This game illustrates both the Tragedy of the Commons for exhaustible (rather
than renewable) resources, the Free Rider Problem, and the Mayflower Problem, as players
prospect for gold in an underground mine. Players are expected to build the mine both by
digging and by purchasing structural supports that prevent collapse. The deeper they dig, the
less profitable mining becomes (due to the increasing expense of structural supports). Like
Bunnies, failure is inevitable as resources are exhausted and further mining becomes
economically untenable. The goal is (again) to post a High Score in a public (e.g., museum or
social network) setting.
Courtroom Cahoots. Simulating the classic Prisoners Dilemma problem, this game creates a
narrative for players as they choose careers of innocence or guilt. Those that choose crime
accumulate points that result from their exploits, provided they avoid prosecution. Those that
choose innocence risk being framed by other players, but can earn their own points by agreeing
to serve as witness against other players. The available crimes escalate from trivial (stealing
gum from the candy store) to massive (Ponzi-scheme, white-collar fraud) as players gain
experience and the stakes increase. Play continues until all players are either convicted or
framed, and serving life sentences without parole in jail. Again, the goal is to post a public High
Score.
Pisces. Pisces is a serious game that teaches about the Tragedy of the Commons,
12

Atherton J S (2013) Learning and Teaching; Experiential Learning

W. Guschwan et al.

sustainability, and ethics. The game was originally designed and built to be played using Excel
spreadsheets to track progress and player choices by Dr. Thomas Seager, Senior Sustainability
Scientist, Global Institute of Sustainability13. Creative technologist Bill Guschwan has taken over
the project and the latest version uses twitter as input, leveraging social media to reach a wider
audience.
Conclusion. Gamiformics is a framework that uses a systems-based view of a person-in-asituation, game-like experiences, and non-cooperative game theory to simulate classic moral
problems and make explicit social interaction and influence. Games such as Pisces position
person and situation as negotiable, and can be analyzed with this new ontology.
References
Aldrich, Clark. 2009. The Complete Guide to Simulations and Serious Games: How the Most
Valuable Content Will Be Created in the Age Beyond Gutenberg to Google. Pfeiffer, ISBN:
978-0-470-46273-7.
Atherton, J S. 2013. Learning and Teaching; Experiential Learning [On-line: UK] retrieved 8 May
2015 from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/experience.htm
Bluemink, Matt. 2015 Man, the Animal Without Essence, 3: Brains, Hands and Tools
http://bluelabyrinths.com/2015/03/29/man-the-animal-without-essence-3-brains-hands-andtools/
Dupuy, Jean-Pierre, 2013, The Artificialization of Life: Designing Self-Organization,The
Science, Politics, and Ontology of Life-Philosophy, Bloomsbury Academic
Guschwan, William, January, 2014, Aristotles Fourfold Causality, Tetralemma, and Emergence,
ETC: A Review of General Semantics, https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1375211796/aristotle-s-fourfold-causality-tetralemma-and-emergence
Juul, Jesper, April 2, 2011, Gamification Backlash Roundup, The Ludologist,
https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/gamification-backlash-roundup
Kant, Immanuel. 1998. Logic. Dover, ISBN: 978-0486256504.
McCarthy, Jim and Michele McCarthy. 2002. Software for Your Head: Core Protocols for
Creating and Maintaining Shared Vision. Addison-Wesley Professional, ISBN: 9780201604566.
Parkin, Simon 2012 Jenova Chen: Journeyman, Eurogame.net,
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-04-02-jenova-chen-journeyman
Sadowski, J, Seager, TP, Selinger, Evan, Spierre SG, Whyte, Kyle (2012) An Experiential
Game-Theoretic Pedagogy for Sustainability Ethics (Springer)
Shaviro, Steven, January 16, 2006, Simondon on Individuation The Pinocchio Theory,
http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=471
Simondon, Gilbert. 1964. Lindividu et sa Gense Physico-Biologique. Paris: Presses
Universitaires de France.
Zichermann, Gabe. 2011. "Gamification Has Issues, but They Aren't the Ones Everyone
Focuses on." O'Reilly Radar. O'Reilly, 15 June 2011. Web. 08 May 2015.

13

Sadowski, J, Seager, TP, Selinger, Evan, Spierre SG, Whyte, Kyle (2012) An Experiential
Game-Theoretic Pedagogy for Sustainability Ethics

Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games

Gamiformics: A Systems-Based Framework for Moral Learning through Games

Author1 Name (William Bill Guschwan) Affiliation: Columbia College Chicago,
wguschwan@colum.edu
Author2 Name (Janell Baxter) Affiliation: Columbia College Chicago, jbaxter@colum.edu
Author3 Name (Thomas Seager) Affiliation: Arizona State University, thomas.seager@asu.edu
Author4 Name (Susan Spierre Clark) Affiliation: Arizona State University,
susan.spierre@asu.edu