Rational Feelings for Virtual Things?

ABSTRACT This article examines the rationality of affective responses to virtual phenomena. I argue that at least some such responses can be perfectly rational, but that virtual realism and virtual irrealism—competing views about the metaphysics of the virtual—differ in their verdicts about the possible rationality of certain types of responses. Realism says that virtual objects are real; irrealism says that they're nonexistent fictions. I argue that while both views can accommodate the rationality of certain affective responses to the virtual, irrealism, unlike realism, significantly restricts the range of possibly rational responses. I suggest that this asymmetry may provide a promising path forward in the metaphysical debate, because we can leverage intuitive judgments about which affective responses to the virtual can be rational in assessing the relative plausibility of realism and irrealism.