Pokemon Are Pokémon meant for battling?

[Frost Mage]

So I was thinking, and I know this was sort of the point of Team Plasma's cause in B/W, but is it ethical to collect Pokemon and use them for battling, if not just to leave them in the PC box? Do they play with each other there, is it like a virtual reality where they can have fun? Is battling what they would be doing in the wild? Do they enjoy it? What do you think?

 

[Shining Goodra]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

It's all the perception of the game and the person playing it, they set their own course. If you think Pokemon play in this "PC box dream land fantasy" or way back in time where Prof.Oak would get all boxed Pokemon and they would go on the ranch and around the lab and wait for Ash to claim them. (The episodes with Muk were always funny). In the virtual world, you're the Gate Keeper. If you think all they do is sit in sleep mode while in the PC then that's what they do. If you think they go to Prof.Oaks Pokemon ranch then that's what they do.

In reality, they're used for training and battling in VGC for prizes and ranking. They are pawns used to only satisfy ourselves, but that's why it's only a video game and not reality. If you can see the similarities though between the game and reality, it's quite shocking. Everyone will use whatever they can to make it to the top, and some will do whatever deems fit. Even if it's destroying the ones around them, which I think the game/show clearly tells. It's all a play on how the world is.

 

[The-Kaiser]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

Well Pokemon Origins showed Pokemon can be used as Pets, Battles, Genetic research.

mind you last 2 have bad and terrible examples that would appall people and prolly make Pokemon Battles illegal but some reason that hasn't happened in the Pokemon verse yet though be interesting if that happened in a more realistic Anime or Movie or Game.

 

[Mitja]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

Yes they are. They can withstand getting seriously injured, including by electric shocks, flames and whatnot, way better than humans or regular animals. They also black out at the point where things would become actually critical.

As for the PC, I assume it's based on the same system as the pokeball, but with a healing-process installed upon entry.
The pokeball sends the pokemon to some kind of phazed dimension, where they do not feel the passage of time or anything else.
So from the Pokemons perspective, they come out of the ball right after they went in.
That's why they don't recover naturally (HP or PP), or get further damaged when poisoned.

 

[Shining Goodra]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

Yes they are. They can withstand getting seriously injured, including by electric shocks, flames and whatnot, way better than humans or regular animals. They also black out at the point where things would become actually critical.

As for the PC, I assume it's based on the same system as the pokeball, but with a healing-process installed upon entry.
The pokeball sends the pokemon to some kind of phazed dimension, where they do not feel the passage of time or anything else.
So from the Pokemons perspective, they come out of the ball right after they went in.
That's why they don't recover naturally (HP or PP), or get further damaged when poisoned.

It's only in the recent games where Pokémon stopped taking damage from poison while in a Pokeball.

 

[Chaos Jackal]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

That's a way too hypothetical question... but yes. Pokemon are meant for battling. Maybe not in the way humans do it, but still. Pokemon battle in the wild, Pokemon want to get stronger. They're also blessed with increased endurance, speed, power and control over certain elements. Everything about them screams "battle".

 

[Cinesra]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

Yes; they're bits of data whose reason for existence is to battle other bits of data.

 

[Frost Mage]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

It's all the perception of the game and the person playing it, they set their own course. If you think Pokemon play in this "PC box dream land fantasy" or way back in time where Prof.Oak would get all boxed Pokemon and they would go on the ranch and around the lab and wait for Ash to claim them. (The episodes with Muk were always funny). In the virtual world, you're the Gate Keeper. If you think all they do is sit in sleep mode while in the PC then that's what they do. If you think they go to Prof.Oaks Pokemon ranch then that's what they do.

In reality, they're used for training and battling in VGC for prizes and ranking. They are pawns used to only satisfy ourselves, but that's why it's only a video game and not reality. If you can see the similarities though between the game and reality, it's quite shocking. Everyone will use whatever they can to make it to the top, and some will do whatever deems fit. Even if it's destroying the ones around them, which I think the game/show clearly tells. It's all a play on how the world is.

Yes; they're bits of data whose reason for existence is to battle other bits of data.

Well aren't you two just rays of sunshine, huh?

I like Mitja and Ice Jackal's theories, personally. More upbeat, and treat Pokemon like living things which they are. (in your imaginaaaaaaation)

 

[DNA]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

The answer is simple.
They are meant for whatever you want them to be meant for.
It is your game. Play it your way. How you choose to view the game is all up to you.
Everything is left up to the player; that's the beauty of headcanon.

 

[professorlight]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

Well, you ask a lot of questions, and some are not easy...
The easy ones first: I adhere to the theory that both pokeballs and PC transfer act like a teleporter, turning the pokemon into data and storing it. That said, I don't think they just stay in stasis, but that they are somewhat able to see what happens and even react (see misty's psyduck). It could possibly be that they take some sort of form inside the pokeball's hammerspace, but don't feel the passage of time.

Now for the ethics... well, if your position is that pokemon are analogous to animals in our world, then yes, battling is unethical, no matter their amazing abilities or if they naturally fight for survival (example, dog/cockfighting is bad, turtle races are hilarious).

If your stance is that pokemon are similar to humans (apparently plasma/N's stance on the subject) then battling and catching them would be very wrong, since it would be a master-slave type of relationship.

If you are of the opinion that pokemon are in betwwen animals and humans, or perhaps that they are an entirely different category of sentient beings, with their own free will and desires, then fighting and catching would be okay, in certain ways. One thing I'll give to ash is that he doesn't force his pokemon to join him; almost all of them went wth him by their own volition, and that's the ideal way to catch a pokemon.
As for fighting, pokemon seem to enjoy fighting by themselves be it in the wild or in a controlled environment, and appear to gain something from it, call it pride, status, whatever, they fight for themselves, as well as the trainer that, well, trains them to do better; it's a social contract, with benefits for both parties's interests.
What I do think is bad, is just collecting and leaving pokemon in the PC; it's okay if you use them once in a while, but if you just catch them for no reason and leave them to rot at the PC, you are taking them away from their lives, and even possibly, preventing them from meeting a trainer who might actually care for them.

DNA's answer is the simplest one you could get, but I think that ethics in pokemon is a extremely interesting thought experiment.

 

[Frost Mage]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

From an in-universe standpoint, if I was a trainer, I would never box Pokemon that I didn't plan on using, or I would spend my days with all of them, because they are (or would be) my best friends, and they're all (again, would be) special to me. So that's my headcanon I guess you could say. c:

I'd always be there for my Pokemon, I'd never push them too hard, and I would never treat them like just means to an end, because they're not. /overly sappy

 

[Brave Vesperia]

RE: Are Pokemon Meant For Battling?

In universe, I imagine that when a Pokémon goes to the PC, they're really going to the nearest Professor's lab. Once there, they're all let into a ranch where they get to play with all of your other Pokémon.

In real life, the box is just a storage space used to view and organize other Pokémon you have captured.

I do think Pokémon are meant for battling though. Not in a forced way, but in the way that they use their own free will to do so. I've always thought most Pokémon enjoy battling and that wild Pokémon lay in wait for a Trainer who will one day catch them and raise them to participate in battles or contests of sorts, which is why they always pop out of grass or water and stuff when a Trainer is near by.

One thing I love about Gen. 6 is Pokémon Amie where you can actually treat them like pets. Sure, I love my competitive Pokémon that I use to battle others with, but do I just let them fight to the point where they black out with no love or attention from me what-so-ever? No!