Morality of mind control…

[overgeeked]

There was a time not too long ago, when I thought mind control type stuff wouldnt make it into the next edition of D&D.

The wheel turns, and maybe its still discussed elsewhere, but yeah at a pretty fundamental level controlling the mind (lol and now I could get myself in trouble...) is evil.

Yep. There's a pretty easy tell. How would you react if this were used against you or someone you love?

Most of the excuses and moralizing and equivocations suddenly disappear when it's phrased like that.

The acceptable circumstances of its use suddenly dwindle to extremely rare exceptions.

"Sure, if I were out of my mind on drugs and about to take out a busload of children / nuns...then, and only then...would it be okay to mind control me..."

When it comes to other people. The field suddenly expands.

 

[Deset Gled]

Generally speaking most people agree that mind control is evil. Full stop.

But there are exceptions. Especially in pop culture. One great example is the Jedi mind trick. Another is the DC Comics superhero Jericho from the Teen Titans.

Is mind control always evil? If so, why?

Can mind control be used for good? If so, how?

I'm with others, like @Whizbang Dustyboots, who believe this is not a binary good/evil thing. At all. Shades of gray, relative morality, and all that.

But I'll expand on what @MGibster said as well. In my experience, it's always magical mind control that people make these extreme statements about evil mind control. For some reason, a magic spell with a Wisdom save is evil. But I have never seen someone claim that a Deception or Performance check to make someone act differently is the same level of evil, even if the end results are exactly the same. I don't think there should be a difference.

It's 100% possible that Ben Kenobi could have simply talked his way through the Imperial checkpoint. It would have been much much riskier, but it's possible. Would that have been any better or worse? IMNSHO, no. YMMV.

We're mind controlled all the time with high technology that is almost (but not quite) indistinguishable from magic. Cookies track you. Ads are tailored to your needs. Companies have been caught listening to your private conversations and reading your private emails. But we're all still here on the internet, willingly subjecting ourselves to the magic lies. For fun, and for profit. I submit that mind control is bad. But it can't be that bad, or none of us would be here on ENWorld to talk about it. It's a level of evil that we have all accepted and live with.

That being said, the gradient of evil-ness still applies to non-magical mind control as well. We accept the cookies. We hope Amazon and Google to get a slap on the wrist when they're caught spying. And we would all sue the heck out of someone who lied about their medical credentials and botched a procedure.

 

[loverdrive]

Good, evil, bleh.

Above everything else, mind control is hot.

 

[Scribe]

Yep. There's a pretty easy tell. How would you react if this were used against you or someone you love?

Most of the excuses and moralizing and equivocations suddenly disappear when it's phrased like that.

The acceptable circumstances of its use suddenly dwindle to extremely rare exceptions.

"Sure, if I were out of my mind on drugs and about to take out a busload of children / nuns...then, and only then...would it be okay to mind control me..."

When it comes to other people. The field suddenly expands.

Thing is in games we really hardly ever interrogate this kind of thing. I think I mentioned way back when I was playing Wrath of the Righteous, and I built a character who was all in on landing Hideous Laughter, to knock an enemy prone, and...well kill it. In my defense, you need to minmax that game, some of the AC's are through the roof....anyway.

I showed this to my near adult (17 year old at the time) son, and he was horrified.

And yeah, I guess it kind of is horrific.

 

[Celebrim]

The topic came up in another thread and I thought it was interesting so here's a dedicated thread.

Generally speaking most people agree that mind control is evil. Full stop.

But there are exceptions. Especially in pop culture. One great example is the Jedi mind trick. Another is the DC Comics superhero Jericho from the Teen Titans.

Is mind control always evil? If so, why?

Can mind control be used for good? If so, how?

Yes.

In my own homebrew, mind control is one of the big categories of "dark magic" or "witchcraft" for which you can be burned at the stake. So much as a "charm person" is considered such a rape of the target's mind to justify the death penalty. Exceptions are sometimes made legally for the use of such magic in self-defense, but it's considered so distasteful that as a practical matter that might not sway an audience. In some cases, just the accusation and "proof" in the form of such a spell found in a spellbook would be enough to get one lynched.

And I don't really believe these societies are being unreasonable to respond to that threat in this manner. Mind control is Evil with a capital E. It's so evil that asking if it can be used for good is a little like asking if murder can be used for good. Indeed, it's a bit worse than that. The only valid defense for homicide really is to prevent homicide or similarly brutal act, and even then you have groups like the Amish saying that really doesn't go far enough. The only valid defense of mind control is the same, only there is something more fearsome and disturbing about the possibility than even simple violence in response to violence.

I think if you are serious about things you'd recognize that in the general case you'd rather be killed by an enemy than mind controlled by an enemy.

 

[Celebrim]

Were the commercials back in the day that used subliminal messages evil (didn’t some movies use hidden commercials between reels back in the 50’s) - deceptive but not evil.

That sounds like the James Vicary hoax. The evidence for such usage is very thin and most of it is urban legend.

 

[MGibster]

Were the commercials back in the day that used subliminal messages evil (didn’t some movies use hidden commercials between reels back in the 50’s) - deceptive but not evil. I consider that mind control
Is voluntary hypnosis evil- I say no.

James Vicary was a market researcher in the 1950s who claimed he was able to increase concession sales in theaters through the use of experimental subliminal advertisements. It turns out his experiments were entirely fraudulent but demonstrated Vicary was good at marketing baloney. Here in the United States, the FCC banned subliminal advertising in 1974. The truth is there's no good evidence that subliminal message are effective.

I'm not because it muddies the waters and equates things that are not the same. Lying is presenting false information and letting the person make up their own mind. Mind control is simply taking control of the person's mind. It's a categorical difference between lying and mind control. Two wildly different things.

We both need to watch the whole scene again.

Stormtrooper: <to Luke>Let me see your identification.
Kenobi: <waves hand>You don't need to see his identification.
Stormtrooper: <to other stormtroopers> We don't need to see his identification.
Kenobi: These aren't the droids you're looking for.
Stormtrooper: <to other stormtroopers> These aren't the droids we're looking for.
Kenobi: He can go about his business.
Stormtrooper: <to Luke> You can go about your business.
Kenobi: Move along.
Stormtrooper: <to Luke> Move along. Move along.

If the Jedi mind trick isn't a form of mind control then I'm ready to accept it was Flint Marko all along who killed Uncle Ben despite the events of the first movie. The stormtrooper was unable to exercise free will due to Kenobi's mind trick.

But, again as above, it's still removing a sentient creature's free will. This is not a good act, but it's not as evil as cutting them down.

Why isn't it a good act? In a moral sense I mean.

I think it's the circumstances that make it acceptable, especially what harm is prevented because of its use. Change things around a bit and see what happens to the moral calculus.

I would certainly agree it's the circumstances that make it acceptable. It's the difference between shooting a man in Reno just to watch him die and shooting him because he was trying to kill you. Either way you're shooting someone, but in one case it's morally wrong and the other it is morally acceptable.

Yep. There's a pretty easy tell. How would you react if this were used against you or someone you love?

If someone cast something like Charm Person on me I'd be hotter than fish oil and ready to rip their head off next time I saw them. Of course they might charm me again, but at least they might roll with Disadvantage if I can start the fight before they have a chance to cast.

 

[MGibster]

In the interest of full transparency, I've put a subliminal message in this post compelling you to like it.

 

[overgeeked]

We both need to watch the whole scene again.

If the Jedi mind trick isn't a form of mind control then I'm ready to accept it was Flint Marko all along who killed Uncle Ben despite the events of the first movie. The stormtrooper was unable to exercise free will due to Kenobi's mind trick.

You seem to have misunderstood me.

The Jedi mind trick is 100% obviously mind control.

Lying and deception are 100% obviously not mind control.

They are categorically different things.

Why isn't it a good act? In a moral sense I mean.

It's not good because you're removing someone's free will. Regardless of why, that's evil. It's the circumstances, like mind controlling someone to prevent deaths...where you're committing a lesser evil to prevent a greater evil that things like mind control become acceptable. Acceptable does not equal good. It's still an evil act.

I would certainly agree it's the circumstances that make it acceptable. It's the difference between shooting a man in Reno just to watch him die and shooting him because he was trying to kill you. Either way you're shooting someone, but in one case it's morally wrong and the other it is morally acceptable.

Exactly. Greater and lesser evil. Self defense. Etc.

If someone cast something like Charm Person on me I'd be hotter than fish oil and ready to rip their head off next time I saw them. Of course they might charm me again, but at least they might roll with Disadvantage if I can start the fight before they have a chance to cast.

Exactly.

 

[kermit4karate]

Right. So that gives us the idea of lesser and greater evil. It's worse, morally, to kill them...despite being space Nazis...than it is to control their minds. Granted. But it's still not good to control their minds.

I'm not because it muddies the waters and equates things that are not the same. Lying is presenting false information and letting the person make up their own mind. Mind control is simply taking control of the person's mind. It's a categorical difference between lying and mind control. Two wildly different things.

Totally agree. Because in that instance, as mentioned by Whiz, it's a case of reducing harm. Ben can either cut them down and start a whole thing...or he can wave his hand at them and control their minds. The particulars are important. He's not forcing them to do something wild or evil, simply letting Ben, Luke, and the droids pass their checkpoint. But, again as above, it's still removing a sentient creature's free will. This is not a good act, but it's not as evil as cutting them down.

As a selfish act to preserve my own life, sure. Most people could probably accept that. But it's still removing a sentient creature's free will and forcing them to attack friends and colleagues.

I think it's the circumstances that make it acceptable, especially what harm is prevented because of its use. Change things around a bit and see what happens to the moral calculus.

An authority figure mind controls a criminal to stop committing a crime.

A vigilante mind controls a criminal to stop committing a crime.

A mother mind controls her kids to behave.

A boss mind controls his employees to work faster.

Your spouse mind controls you to finally get on that to-do list.

There are infinite variations on this. For most people, I'd guess the lines are pretty clear. Is it justified in the particular circumstances. It's relatively easy to find the obvious "don't cross this line" spots. That's not as interesting to me. The harder ones are the ones closer to "the center" as it were.

Yes. Because the Stormtroopers would retain their free will. It's one of those things we're cavalier about sacrificing for other people, but would absolutely go mad if it were used against us. I always question things like that.

I disagree, as explained above.

Yes. Lying and mind control are categorically different things. Convincing a cop to let you out of a ticket is one thing. Telepathically entering their mind and taking control over it to force them to let you out of a ticket is something entirely different. As you say, it's abuse.

You can switch the circumstances and the target infinitely to arrive at the spots where it's acceptable. Preventing violence, etc. But I'd suggest it's only a lesser evil, not a good.

Mind control that allows the target a chance to resist, like a save, sure seems like them having the free will or mental fortitude as it were to choose for themselves. Just like with lying, some people are tougher to convince.

I still don't see a clear distinction between them. If it's acceptable to lie sometimes, then it's acceptable to mind control sometimes too. Both are covert forms of mental manipulation. Not saying either is super ethical and great to do, but the morality depends on the particulars of a given situation.