Blockland Ethics Questions: Vampire Age Gap (Vote on Strawpoll)

[ultimamax]

For the patient-doctor example, this is only effective when critiquing act utilitarianism. When one considers the further outcomes of creating the possibility of you being killed and your organs being harvested when you go to seek help at a hospital, this would create a situation where people would avoid going to a hospital in fear of it, thus causing more harm in the long run and making it a bad option.

okay but this implies that the patient doctor example would still be okay if you could keep it secret somehow. e.g. the doctor lets them die of a curable disease by faking their diagnosis. or that it would be okay if you only did it once

For the ancient Rome hypothetical I would oppose the premise that the only form of entertainment that the people can enjoy is one where gladiators kill each other. If it somehow were the case, then it would be moral, because I am not in the business of causing more suffering in order to stop a more explicit form of suffering.

that isn't a premise of the thought experiment. if we're talking about classic utilitarianism where we seek to maximize total happiness and minimize total pain, then even in a society with many ways of entertaining yourself, it would be a net good and a moral imperative to build and maintain a massive gladiator coliseum

it sounds like you might be defining utility as an absence of pain then, rather than an absence of pain + an abundance of happiness. which i have less issues with (but it still has issues)

How the out-of-touch mega-rich have deluded themselves into thinking that their actions are for the betterment of humanity is, I think, not the fault of utilitarianism.

yeah when it comes to tech ceos i'm just trying to point out how it can be used as a rhetorical device/self serving philosophy. i think regardless of whether they consider themselves utilitarians, they would be doing evil stuff like this, so you cant rly blame utilitarianism as an ethical theory i guess

[Ad Bot]

[Nicepoint]

I'm willing to bite the bullet with the doctor example. Though even those examples aren't realistic.

The coliseum would not be a moral imperative if better outcomes can be achieved with other less harmful methods. The choice between coliseum and some other form of entertainment is happiness + death, and just happiness.

[Trogtor]

incest is funny because like personally it's hot etc but also I would never in a million years have love with my actual sister. and like everyone else I know who's into it either feels the same way or is just an only child lmao. I'm sure there's people out there who really do wanna forget their siblings, and maybe an even smaller fraction whose sibling feels the same, but ive sure as hell never met any of those

incest is only hot because you're fantasizing about the idea that your loveually appealing/dream girl is your sister. nobody actually wants to sleep with their sister. your sister's personality is gonna affect how you find girls attractive, mostly in a negative way.

your "dream girl" being your sister in itself is a paradox. nobody wants to sleep with their sister. that's gross.

that's why research always opts for stepsisters, that's way more realistic.

that being said, hell no. not even a double gulp cup of honey packs could make me even consider sleeping with my sister. not okay

[Metalliku]

even with a condom there's no way this won't eventually evolve into something worse depending on the experience, maybe my sister would want more from me, maybe she wouldn't want me to wear a condom at all, and one day something might slip and everything may go downhill from there for both of us. so no, i wouldn't do it, not even if they offered me a million dollars, it ain't right

[Rigel]

nobody actually wants to sleep with their sister. your sister's personality is gonna affect how you find girls attractive, mostly in a negative way.

Yeah I gotta agree there. Banging your sister has too much baggage. I think my sister's hot, I'd bang her if she wasn't my sister. But it'd be too awkward afterwards, I couldn't personally deal with it, even if everyone I knew had no problems with it. Hell, banging a girl who has a boyfriend is too much baggage for me and that's way more acceptable. But if there's a brother and sister couple who aren't bothered by it, all the power to them. Just try not to have inbred babies.

[Dr.Block]

Sister loving is a bad idea, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's unethical

My question is, does it change the math at all if your sibling is the same love as you? No matter how complicated things get, there's never going to be any kids unless you adopt.

[Conan]

i really hate this topic can we get a new one

[bloody jumper]

i really hate this topic can we get a new one

yeah lol this is really uncomfortable and not even interesting to discuss

[Goth77]

i really hate this topic can we get a new one

yeah, this topic went south real fast ...

[BrickQuake]

i hate to say it but this is a reddit tier thread

[Rigel]

yeah, this topic went south real fast ...

haw haw

Okay, moving on to the next question early due to popular demand.



This third question is about age gaps.

An "age gap" refers to the difference in age between romantic partners. A common criticism of large age gaps is that the older partner has more worldly experience than the younger partner, and this could cause the relationship to be inherently manipulative or trend towards abuse.

What age should the younger partner be for the age gap between them and the older partner not to matter? Assume a floor of 20 years old.
If there is no age that the age gap stops being unethical, then what should the maximum age gap be? Does the ethical age gap range grow wider the older the younger partner gets? For example, if the younger partner is 20, should their older partner be no more than five years older? If they're 40, should their older partner be no more than 15 years older? Explain your reasoning for either.

Taking this question to its extreme, assume the older partner is a 500 year old vampire. They have never met, nor heard of other vampires and assume themselves to be the only immortal person on the planet. Worrying only about the age gap and lived experience, is it ethical for them to engage in romance with a normal person? If yes, what's the youngest age of mortal they should be allowed to date? 20? 50? 100? Or is it not ethical at all, does the age gap of hundreds of years of lived experience become so problematic that the vampire cannot ethically find love in a human at all?
https://strawpoll.com/xVg71N9DRyr

[Refticus]

This third question is about age gaps.

[Goth77]

haw haw

heh, glad u caught it

age gaps

ya it depends on the age. for example a 25 year old dating a 15 year old is obviously wrong - but it's completely acceptable for a 30 year old and a 40 year old to be together even though the 'age gap' is the same.

anything more than like 20 years seems kinda odd tho, like a 70 year old being with a 50 year old a bit weird...but at that point yall been adults forever so who gives a stuff i guess lol

[Dr.Block]

Op is this your way of asking for advice