Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9178763" data-attributes="member: 6801228">You've accused me of psychopathy multiple times by this point. Also, don't put words in my mouth. Morality is incredibly complex and I have not taken the stance you are clinging to. In fact, I have REPEATEDLY tried to understand why we need some sort of "this is more evil than this" measure when no one other than you has tried to rank these things on a moral scale.You could also run away. You don't need to kill someone just because they saw you. You've created a dichotomy that doesn't need to exist "I have only two choices, murdering you, or warping your mind and erasing your memories, there is no other choice" is false. You have other choices. So much of morality is context based, why isn't it more moral to risk letting the janitor see you and run away rather than defaulting to murder or mind-warping?In all circumstances, no matter what? Again, you aren't accounting for a vast array of possibilities, and various other types of harm. What if your theft leads to them being a homeless drug addict, suffering day in and day out? Have you truly done a lesser evil? You keep acting like "well, clearly there is only one correct and obvious answer" when, again, if it was that simple, this wouldn't be a set of questions humanity has grappled with for thousands of years.But this isn't from the perspective of the bank teller. This is from the perspective of the robber, who is committing an immoral act either way. Saying "this type of immoral act is slightly less immoral" IS kind of splitting hairs. It seems to be with the intention of allowing certain immoral acts to pass as "fine" because they are less evil than other immoral acts.And what is the general stance on the morality of removing a person's freedom of choice? Of enslaving them for example? Is that generally high on the list or low on the list? Well... depends where and when you ask, doesn't it? And, again, again, and again, you are creating a dichotomy. "I can kill you, or warp your mind to my will." like there is no other possible option you could possibly take.Ah yes, children. Classically the most morally sound of individuals. Pay no mind to children who savagely beat other children because they touched a toy that didn't belong to them. We all know children are moral paragons!Because there is a doubtful difference in perception because we can justify "killing" a human being but "murder" is different? Like somehow both don't end up with a human being dead.So, a DnD example. That means you broke into someone else's home, to steal something that doesn't belong to them, and you decided to be the morally correct person by mind controlling them so they can't protect their property instead of murdering them in their own home and taking it anyways? And those are your only options for moral choice?Well, since we are talking about DnD examples, isn't having an eternity of bliss in a plane of pure good, where nothing bad can happen to you, quite a degree better than struggling and suffering and grinding away years of your life on a small chance of recovery? Does that change the equation at all? Or does a DnD example no longer apply because it is inconvenient to your point?What if I argued the basis of laws is to protect property and keep the powerful in power? Is that truly so absurd? Clearly not as many philosophers and social thinkers have argued exactly that. Again, if laws were drawn from morality, then wouldn't we have laws mandating that we care for the sick and unhoused? Wouldn't we have laws that are compassionate?A majority? Maybe. But studies (<a href="https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/mentalimpact.shtml" target="_blank">Mental Health Impact of Rape</a>) have shown that suicidal thoughts among rape victims are 33% compared to the 8% average. That is a third, who may very well disagree with you. Especially when their own body is literally turned against them. Seriously, stop trying to downplay this. If Murder was the absolute worst thing that could happen to someone, we could not have a conception of "A Fate worse than Death" and that's a whole trope-page by itself. And most of these fates, or a common way to portray them, involve being trapped in your own body, and incapable of acting, the exact state that can be created by enchantment.Right, you've moved on from calling me a psychopath at every opportunity to simply saying that I can't possibly hold any of my own opinions, because you opinions are obviously and objectively correct.Because you keep trying to rank them. You can't seem to accept that my initial contribution to this entire conversation was "Mind control isn't good" and "Evocation isn't mind control" and have since repeatedly harassed and spoken down to me about your understanding of morality, and how everyone agrees with you. I didn't see a point in comparing one evil thing to another evil thing, but you kept insisting that one was less evil, one was better, one was sparing lives that otherwise would have been lost. You've dragged me into this, insisting that every single person with a working brain must agree with your positions, which you felt the need to put on blast just because I dared to say that fireball doesn't mind control people. You wanted the discussion. So here we are. Discussing it.Not a lie when everything you say seems to be followed "but the other option is to commit murder, and that's worse!"</blockquote>

Verification