No, you're mistaking what I'm saying. When I say "Justify it yourself, not by the fiction", I'm talking about not letting the fiction be a justification unto itself. I pointed to the
Thermian Argument as an example of this. Does that make more sense?
Thank you. I had forgotten the name of that argument.
Defenses of "that's how it is in the fictional world!" beg the question of
WHY it is that way in the fictional world.
To see why this, and other appeals to, "it is a fiction" don't fly as a broad justification, consider the following:
A person comes into their job one day, and hangs a picture of their boss in the shared kitchen area, and plays darts with the boss as the target. When the boss asks, the explanation, "Well, you shouldn't be offended, because while that
looks like throwing darts at you, it is really just a fictional thing that looks like you. We can do anything to a fiction, and not have it mean anything in the real world," is still going to end up with you looking for a new job the next day. And rightfully so.
Your
internal excuse for a fictional thing is not relevant to real people outside the fiction. Your choice to make a fiction that looks just like abuse is what's relevant, as is how you defend that choice.