• LustyArgonian
    link
    English
    12
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    No. What? “Is it moral if I rape a girl for money” is not peak philosophy. It’s not even a new idea. Holy fuck. You give philosophy a bad name.

    • Unbecredible
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      What do you think about the parallel I was trying to draw between the video I mentioned and this guy’s question about paying for rape? I thought the reason that someone’s interest could be caught by the video is similar in nature to the reasons someone might wonder “is it okay to pay to hurt someone”? And that train of thought leads naturally enough to “Well how much harm is permissible for what amount of money?” which leads naturally enough to imagining specific circumstances.

      And those trains of thought are similar to the thought behind people’s ancient musings about other tricky question of morality like the trolley problem. It’s not peak philosophy it’s just ordinary human thought. You shouldn’t be so afraid or repulsed by it or whatever.

      • LustyArgonian
        link
        English
        44 months ago

        The question reads like a sexual fantasy, to be clear. It doesn’t read like a normal innocent question. It reads like he thinks a LOT about how he can rape kids and get away with it socially, hence the poll. It does not read innocently. It is entirely too specific.

        • Unbecredible
          link
          fedilink
          English
          54 months ago

          You’re probably right about this specific dude’s motivations for posing the question, but I think I am right that this type of thought is entirely normal and even common to have. You are right about the dismissiveness too, sorry.

          • @catbum
            link
            2
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Just chiming in to say I think you’re right in that these types of thought experiments pop into people’s heads pretty regularly, albeit with way less “trying to justify a creepy sex fantasy” intent like the public poll post seems to have.

            Though I have to question why it was public in the first place. I don’t know who the poster is or if it’s their real name, but what if it’s less “projection” and more “morbid curiosity” in seeing just how many people would answer yes to this heinous question? There is some merit in gauging reactions to this from a social psychology point of view (even if this is an non-scientific example).

            Follow-up thought. Without morbid thought experiments, how do people create horror stories and gritty crime dramas like L&O:SVU when a story has no particular real life basis? I’m not sure it’s wholly possible in a fictional novel or show. There’s a reason people eat crime dramas up; it’s fascinating and horrifying to see how far a real and fictionalized human will go in various circumstances.

            In a way, it’s a manifestation of the “call of the void” situation, where an intrusive thought (what if I jump off this bridge right now? what happens if I yank the steering wheel driving 50mph? spook a herd of grazing horses? slap grandpa upside the head? while out hunting??) so I think its purpose is more to keep you aware of harzards in whatever the situation may be. Avoidance through sudden acknowledgement of the risk.

            Again, I don’t recognize this person or know any background, but maybe they posed the question as a wacky means of self-preservation on a broader level? As if the poller thought, “How many of my viewers would prostitute out their child if given the most forgiving, financially advantageous, and seemingly consensual circumstances?” to figure out how worried they should be about a certain percentage of their friends, neighbors, and/or followers. Avoidance through asking weird questions publicly.

            Edit: Holy ship I managed to write a whole novel on my thought experiment about thought experiments ahhahh.

      • LustyArgonian
        link
        English
        24 months ago

        Lol no. If this was something I thought was said in “good faith,” then it would be fine to discuss. However, I don’t think it was said in good faith and I think the person was being intentionally disgusting. It’s not ordinary human thought. But thanks for being so dismissive.

        • KubeRoot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          04 months ago

          But thanks for being so dismissive.

          Like you weren’t?

          • LustyArgonian
            link
            English
            14 months ago

            Where? Disagreement isn’t dismissiveness.

      • @eatthecake
        link
        24 months ago

        The train of thought that youtube story leads me to is not ‘how much harm is permissible’ but ‘why are humans such vile creatures?’. Does everbody just love the thought of hurting others? Is this normal? Why the fuck would anyone want to staple some guys chest?