Read Final Fantasy and Philosophy: The Ultimate Walkthrough for Free Online Page B

VIII ’s gun-swords are tacky and look silly, and you disagree and say, “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” then there’s not any more conversation to be had about the gun-swords—we simply take it that beauty is relative to each person. Hume, however, did not want us to end the conversation. While beauty may ultimately be in how we perceive an object, there does seem to be a strong connection between the object and what we perceive as beautiful, and without this connection we would be unable to have any standard of taste.
    Could Cloud Strife Beat Superman in a Fight?
    If beauty is not in objects, then it seems that all of our sentiments would be equal—no one’s sentiments would be better or worse than another person’s. Sentiments, taken by themselves, are neither right nor wrong. When we see the color red, our experience of red is neither right nor wrong—it just is. So why do we ever bother with disagreements about art? If it is, at root, as subjective as we’ve been discussing, there is no disagreement to be had. If I like chocolate ice cream and you like vanilla and you dislike chocolate and I dislike vanilla, there doesn’t seem to be anything more to say about our preferences other than acknowledging them—and then buying and eating the ice cream we each like.
    But Hume suggested that disagreements may arise from considering two artworks that are vastly different in quality. Let’s compare Final Fantasy VII and its hero, Cloud Strife, with Superman 64 and its hero, Superman. Cloud Strife is great with a sword, has special limit break powers, and, despite his identity problems, is an accomplished hero. Superman is insanely powerful and can do almost anything. In a battle, Superman would almost certainly win (unless Materia is actually kryptonite, in which case Cloud’s chances of victory would be much greater). But what would happen in a fight between their respective video games? Those familiar with both games will immediately see a clear winner: Final Fantasy VII. This is because Superman 64 is, by the estimation of many, a broken game. Final Fantasy VII is not only a working game, it is a game that is praised, is often discussed, and ranks highly in the history of video games. Is saying that Superman 64 is a better game than Final Fantasy VII just as reasonable as saying the opposite? Keep in mind that the question is not whether someone likes or enjoys Superman 64 (although it’s hard to see how one can enjoy a broken game), but whether it is better than Final Fantasy VII . I think most of us would agree that there is little room for disagreement here— Final Fantasy VII ’s superiority is not simply a matter of what we prefer . We seem to recognize that there are differences of quality between works, and we don’t always treat them as simply different flavors of ice cream. Now, do we bite the bullet and say that all of our disagreements are mistaken, or do we try to both explain how beauty is a subjective experience and maintain that we are still able to objectively assess its value?
    The Sea Devil’s in the Details
    Like Final Fantasy VII , most of the games in the Final Fantasy series seem to be of higher quality than many other games that are available. Its full-motion videos, such as Bahamut’s attack on Alexandria in Final Fantasy IX , are expertly rendered and awe-inspiring. Its stories are well told, emotionally gripping, and coherent. For example, Cecil the Dark Knight’s path in Final Fantasy IV to become a Paladin at Mt. Ordeals still gives me goose bumps. Interesting characters, plots, and art design are found throughout the Final Fantasy series. The excellent quality of these characteristics does not seem to simply be our subjective preference for them. But if they aren’t subjective preferences, then what are these qualities? They can’t be in the object, as we’ve already pointed out, at least not completely. Yet there does seem to be something in objects that excites