I believe you are referring to this forum thread? http://forums.pokemontabletop.com/topic/9803938/1/
Some interesting thoughts. I agree with the member who weighs in on the fourth page, SeaSee, pointing out that, in fact, Pokémon in the anime (which, let’s face it, has to be the main source for this kind of background stuff, since the games just don’t care much about worldbuilding) can actually leave their Pokéballs without being called and generally seem to be at least partially aware the world around them while inside, which I think seriously challenges a lot of the assumptions that people tend to make about how this stuff works. I think most of the other conversants here are missing that. A lot of the time Pokémon break out of their Pokéballs for comedic effect, most notably Jessie’s Wobuffet and Misty’s Psyduck, so I can understand taking it with a grain of salt, but there are important serious examples too – the one that most readily comes to mind for me is when Ash’s Pokémon refuse to let him shiver through a blizzard alone in Snow Way Out. I would add to this the practice of keeping Pokémon in cages, as Team Rocket often do in both the games and anime – if Pokéballs really do have the kind of power often attributed to them, it seems to me that cages are an insecure and costly waste of space. Several of the forum members in this discussion characterise Pokémon training as slavery, but I feel it clearly involves a lot more give-and-take than that. Then again, when the games finally did weigh in on the discussion, as another member points out, it was with the Shadow Triad’s comment in Black and White 2 that Pokémon in Pokéballs are ‘fated’ to obey, and N’s subsequent call for a world without Pokéballs (this was all after I wrote my article on the subject, of course). I think the current position of the games, then – which may change in a few days with the release of X and Y! – is that Pokéballs are a problem, but the institution of Pokémon training itself is not. I don’t think Pokéballs do ‘brainwash’ Pokémon in any consistent or measurable sense, and as you know from my ethics article I don’t think Pokémon can even be captured at all unless they are fundamentally accepting of the concept of partnership with humans. However, I am coming to suspect that Pokéballs do change the symbolism of the relationship and thus damage the way both sides view it, and also give the human side a greater degree of control in terms of transport and the administration of medical care. The invention of Pokéballs has changed the way both sides view what’s going on – and not for the better.
One more point. Member Esprit15 noted the likelihood that different species of Pokémon likely do not view capture in precisely the same way. This, I think, is something very important to keep in mind. The games, the anime and the fans all have a tendency to think in terms of a simplified dichotomy between humans on one side and Pokémon on the other, because it’s easier for us to deal with the issues in those terms. That means, however, that we are putting one species on one side of the relationship and seven hundred-odd species on the other, and stubbornly treating it as monolithic. I’m not certain this is wise. I do not hold with those who say that many Pokémon are of only animal intelligence and can be viewed as being in the same position as pets in the real world (I think that almost all Pokémon are of at least near-human intelligence, although the waters are muddied by the fact that there are different kinds of intelligence to consider – logical and emotional, as well as more abstract things like creativity and leadership), but I do believe that different species understand life, family, society and battle in different ways, and that the assumption that capture and training affect all of them in the same way is not necessarily a sound one.
I’ll tackle your next question later.
Pokémaniacal 