How flexible are your ethics? and how flexible should they be? Moral scenario exercise.

[mshidden]

I shudder when someone talks about absolute moral theory, my first thought is their afraid to do the math, we are not all equal. No I am not trying to troll, I am trying to point out that ethics is situational and you have to do the moral math if you want to get to the next level of ethics.

 

A pawn can be worth more than a queen, in some instances, this is true in chess it’s also true in life.  I once played a much better chess player and beat him simply because he overvalued his queen.  I sacrificed my queen for his, and he was devastated.

 

 So I was recently asked to come up with a moral example, to illustrate this point, So I thought I would share it in a new post by itself. It’s a scenario where you get to play a social worker.

 

You are a social worker, working in Arkansas, and and Marry, a mother of 3,  confess to having sex with her 13 year old adopted step son John.  Marry feels horrible about it, and want’s help.  She is living with her brother in lawn Eric and her quadriplegic wife Brandy.  Brandy was in the car accident that killed Mary's husband and left Brandy in a  wheelchair for life,  needing 24hr care . Eric is a long haul truck driver, and is hardly ever home. You are checking on Brandy, it was Brandy during a private conversation, that asked you to talk to Marry to find out what was wrong.

 

Brandy said. “Marry is such a wonderful person and she works so hard, I hate to see her in such pain, she takes such good care of me, and the house, I don’t know what I would do without her help.  God has truly blessed me with her, and her 3 kids, I love having them running around the house, laughing, and carrying on, they are such happy kids, please can you talk to her and see if you can help, I know she misses her husband horribly, I am sure it has somthing to do with that.”

 

So what do you do,  and why?

 

[dsayers]

we are not all equal. ... A pawn can be worth more than a queen

 

Begs the question by pretending that gaming pieces are normative and representative.

 

You still have yet to answer the question about your assertion that intention outweighs behavior in moral consideration, so you kind of don't get to accuse other people of avoiding stuff.

 

http://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/39700-context-sensitivity-of-ethics-and-a-question-of-rape/#entry363641

[cynicist]

So what do you do,  and why?

 

What you do is irrelevant to the morality of the situation. An adult having sex with a 13 year-old is always immoral due to the power disparity, and god, even worse when it's the parent. (since parents have the greatest power disparity possible, and therefore should be held to the highest standards in regards to how they deal with their children)

 

This is one of those odd flag pole scenarios that people bring up. There is no way to win here, no good outcome, and it has little to do with ethics.

[ProfessionalTeabagger]

We ARE all equal in terms of ethics. It's equally wrong to rape, murder, steal or assault a person regardless of their status. 

[Ancient Mariner]

You are a social worker, working in Arkansas, and and Marry, a mother of 3,  confess to having sex with her 13 year old adopted step son John.  Marry feels horrible about it, and want’s help.  She is living with her brother in lawn Eric and her quadriplegic wife Brandy.  Brandy was in the car accident that killed Mary's husband and left Brandy in a  wheelchair for life,  needing 24hr care . Eric is a long haul truck driver, and is hardly ever home. You are checking on Brandy, it was Brandy during a private conversation, that asked you to talk to Marry to find out what was wrong.

 

Brandy said. “Marry is such a wonderful person and she works so hard, I hate to see her in such pain, she takes such good care of me, and the house, I don’t know what I would do without her help.  God has truly blessed me with her, and her 3 kids, I love having them running around the house, laughing, and carrying on, they are such happy kids, please can you talk to her and see if you can help, I know she misses her husband horribly, I am sure it has somthing to do with that.”

 

So what do you do,  and why?

 

It is amazing how people defend the state unconsciously. In the scenario presented by the OP:

 

Mary is the state. The motherland. The rapist who takes care of the sick.

 

John represents young citizens. He is appropriately Mary’s step son. John didn't choose to be there. He was born or taken into the marriage without choice (social contract). He is abused by the mother(land)

 

Brandy represents the sick and the poor. And, of course, as stated in the OP's last paragraph is the recipient of all the wonderful behavior of the mother(land). 

 

Eric represents the market. He represents people who work. And, you see, the market cannot take care of the poor/sick.

 

The unconscious analogy becomes very clear when the OP asks the question "what do you do?" This is the typical argument by statists that point out that "without the state, who would take care of the sick?!"

 

The sick thing about this is that it is all framed inside a dicussion of ethics. 

[mshidden]

Begs the question by pretending that gaming pieces are normative and representative.

 

You still have yet to answer the question about your assertion that intention outweighs behavior in moral consideration, so you kind of don't get to accuse other people of avoiding stuff.

 

http://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/39700-context-sensitivity-of-ethics-and-a-question-of-rape/#entry363641

Intresty way to avoid answer the question.  I did'nt ask the question because I thought you would like it I asked the question to see how many people under stand harm, and human suffering.  Do we need socal workers?

 

It is amazing how people defend the state unconsciously. In the scenario presented by the OP:

 

Mary is the state. The motherland. The rapist who takes care of the sick.

 

John represents young citizens. He is appropriately Mary’s step son. John didn't choose to be there. He was born or taken into the marriage without choice (social contract). He is abused by the mother(land)

 

Brandy represents the sick and the poor. And, of course, as stated in the OP's last paragraph is the recipient of all the wonderful behavior of the mother(land). 

 

Eric represents the market. He represents people who work. And, you see, the market cannot take care of the poor/sick.

 

The unconscious analogy becomes very clear when the OP asks the question "what do you do?" This is the typical argument by statists that point out that "without the state, who would take care of the sick?!"

 

The sick thing about this is that it is all framed inside a dicussion of ethics. 

 

intresting, do we need socal workers?

[mick_towe]

Intresty way to avoid answer the question.

 

He isn't avoiding the question. He is asking you for an example that meets the criteria that you claim the above example meets. I am asking for the same thing.

 

In the other thread I have made a case for why your example is flawed. Discussion can not continue until you provide us an example where it is ethically ok for an adult to have sex with a child. If you can not do this, your question is irrelevant.

[mshidden]

How is suggesting

 

 

He isn't avoiding the question. He is asking you for an example that meets the criteria that you claim the above example meets. I am asking for the same thing.

 

In the other thread I have made a case for why your example is flawed. Discussion can not continue until you provide us an example where it is ethically ok for an adult to have sex with a child. If you can not do this, your question is irrelevant.

Fair enough, but that is why I posted this question by itself.

I never said it was OK, it is a question of what we do about it after the fact.  In this case we can't prevent the harm to John, the question is what do we do about it after the fact.  So I am not saying what Mary did should be consider OK, I am asking now what?  And suggesting by the context that more harm can be done if we do not act carefully... I will answer more fully later, but right now I want to understand where people are coming from.  The problem is theory is all well and good, but we need to know how to apply it, so I want to understand how people apply their theories and beliefs given a hard scenario.  We are also dealing with a Taboo subject which makes me more than a bit nervous.  So I can understand why people are hesitant to dive into it. So anyone that dose I consider courageous.

[cynicist]

Well caution sounds perfectly reasonable, the only issue I have with your post is that you seem to be suggesting that all morally gray areas need to be addressed before we can claim to have any answers to the question of ethics. This is a dangerous position to take because while scenarios like the one you describe are rare, things like war happen quite often. 

 

If this is just a hypothetical exercise then have at it, but I'm not sure I would call it courageous...

[dsayers]

Intresty way to avoid answer the question.  I did'nt ask the question because I thought you would like it I asked the question to see how many people under stand harm, and human suffering.

 

I agree that it is interesting that you could avoid a question, accuse others of avoiding, then when the hypocrisy is pointed out, claim that that is avoiding also. Your posts are almost all output and no input.

 

For example, your sentence about seeing how many people understand X, Y, and Z is arrogant. How do you know that YOU do? If you avoid questions, do not express curiosity, and ignore challenges, then it is not the truth that you seek and we have nothing further to discuss.

[mick_towe]

And suggesting by the context that more harm can be done if we do not act carefully...

 

Would you be saying this if it was Eric doing the abusing? After all the kids are dependant on his paycheck. Surely they would starve without it.

 

WE are not doing anything to Marry and her family. Marry is responsible for the consequences of her actions. Whether she is banished from society or burned at the stake (I don't know how free societies will handle this problem) , she committed the unethical act and the repercussion on her family are her responsibility.

 

Transferring responsability to others in this case is benevolent sexism which is a very real non-theoretical problem that has wide spread consequences for human beings all over the planet currently.

[ribuck]

"So what do you do,  and why?"

 

1. You keep the social worker out of the picture, because there's a good chance she will mess things up further.

 

2. Any person who is able and willing to, may offer a safe refuge to John. It's up to John whether he takes up any offers.

 

3. Mary's obligations are to her children, including reparations to John. She is not obligated to look after Brandy. If necessary, Eric can switch his job to driving local trucks so that he can be home often enough to care for Brandy. Or, if he earns lots more by driving long distance, he can pay for additional help for Brandy.

 

If would be tragic if the social worker (or anyone else) suggested turning a blind eye to John's suffering so that Mary could keep looking after Brandy. If her "ethics" are flexible enough to accommodate that, then they're not ethics.

[Freedomain]

I shudder when someone talks about absolute moral theory, my first thought is their afraid to do the math, we are not all equal. No I am not trying to troll, I am trying to point out that ethics is situational and you have to do the moral math if you want to get to the next level of ethics.

 

A pawn can be worth more than a queen, in some instances, this is true in chess it’s also true in life.  I once played a much better chess player and beat him simply because he overvalued his queen.  I sacrificed my queen for his, and he was devastated.

 

 So I was recently asked to come up with a moral example, to illustrate this point, So I thought I would share it in a new post by itself. It’s a scenario where you get to play a social worker.

 

You are a social worker, working in Arkansas, and and Marry, a mother of 3,  confess to having sex with her 13 year old adopted step son John.  Marry feels horrible about it, and want’s help.  She is living with her brother in lawn Eric and her quadriplegic wife Brandy.  Brandy was in the car accident that killed Mary's husband and left Brandy in a  wheelchair for life,  needing 24hr care . Eric is a long haul truck driver, and is hardly ever home. You are checking on Brandy, it was Brandy during a private conversation, that asked you to talk to Marry to find out what was wrong.

 

Brandy said. “Marry is such a wonderful person and she works so hard, I hate to see her in such pain, she takes such good care of me, and the house, I don’t know what I would do without her help.  God has truly blessed me with her, and her 3 kids, I love having them running around the house, laughing, and carrying on, they are such happy kids, please can you talk to her and see if you can help, I know she misses her husband horribly, I am sure it has somthing to do with that.”

 

So what do you do,  and why?

 

 

Simply saying "ethics is situational" is not an arguement. Why do universal ethicical theories make you uncomfortable?

 

Regarding the flagpole scenerio... what do I do? Run as fast as I can.

[mshidden]

Simply saying "ethics is situational" is not an arguement. Why do universal ethicical theories make you uncomfortable?

 

Regarding the flagpole scenerio... what do I do? Run as fast as I can.

I am sorry I don't understand... apply your theory to the above  and show me the rustles of your actions, I can be wrong, about universal ethics, but please show me it works.

[Freedomain]

I am sorry I don't understand... apply your theory to the above  and show me the rustles of your actions, I can be wrong, about universal ethics, but please show me it works.

 

[mshidden]

Talk about beating around the bush... a 3 hour replay to a simple  2 Paragraph post?  That’s a classic example of a snow job. If it takes you 3 hours to make a point, I think it would be fair to call it a mountain.  Seriously though is my question really that hard?  

I will do my homework and get back to you… but 3 hours realy?  Do I get freedomainradio credits.

[dsayers]

Talk about beating around the bush... a 3 hour replay to a simple  2 Paragraph post?  That’s a classic example of a snow job.

 

Like your 74+ hr (and counting) in the making reply to a 1 paragraph question that is directly related to the thread YOU created?

 

http://www.liquidhearth.com/forum/general/2019-michigan-hearthstone-league-sponsored-by-pharo-llc#17

 

I think I understand why you need for morality to be subjective: You have no issue with asserting standards for others that you excuse yourself from.

[cynicist]

I am sorry I don't understand... apply your theory to the above  and show me the rustles of your actions, I can be wrong, about universal ethics, but please show me it works.

 

I already did, but nobody can help you when you refuse to see.

[tjt]

Deleted. I realized my comment may have been offensive. Apologies to OP, I did not realize you had a learning disability which effects the way you write until I read another thread.

[Omegahero09]

 

You are a social worker, working in Arkansas, and and Marry, a mother of 3,  confess to having sex with her 13 year old adopted step son John.  Marry feels horrible about it, and want’s help.  She is living with her brother in lawn Eric and her quadriplegic wife Brandy.  Brandy was in the car accident that killed Mary's husband and left Brandy in a  wheelchair for life,  needing 24hr care . Eric is a long haul truck driver, and is hardly ever home. You are checking on Brandy, it was Brandy during a private conversation, that asked you to talk to Marry to find out what was wrong.

 

Brandy said. “Marry is such a wonderful person and she works so hard, I hate to see her in such pain, she takes such good care of me, and the house, I don’t know what I would do without her help.  God has truly blessed me with her, and her 3 kids, I love having them running around the house, laughing, and carrying on, they are such happy kids, please can you talk to her and see if you can help, I know she misses her husband horribly, I am sure it has somthing to do with that.”

 

So what do you do,  and why?

 

Additionally you open your ethics test from the standpoint of someone who wields the sword and pen of the government- to anarchists.

 

Try again.

[mshidden]

Additionally you open your ethics test from the standpoint of someone who wields the sword and pen of the government- to anarchists.

 

Try again.

Their is no government in this example... you are projecting. This is on the local personal level... what do you do not what government should do. Yes thus far no one has seen that... but yet some have used government power to punish Mary... interesting right? I said social work I did not say government social worker. 

[fractional slacker]

Sorry, off topic question. I see the OP has a -33 rating. At what point does the negative rating negate originating threads or posting?

[cynicist]

Sorry, off topic question. I see the OP has a -33 rating. At what point does the negative rating negate originating threads or posting?

 

I don't believe it does. It simply hides them from view.

[fractional slacker]

I don't believe it does. It simply hides them from view.

Thank you for letting me know.

[Omegahero09]

Their is no government in this example... you are projecting. This is on the local personal level... what do you do not what government should do. Yes thus far no one has seen that... but yet some have used government power to punish Mary... interesting right? I said social work I did not say government social worker. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_work

 

They must be licensed by the state, and they work for governments and for universities. So there is little context, for at least what I understand that the social worker should, or even could do, so why even put that into your test?As far as your test- it's fubar, beyond getting close to any kind of virtue, regardless of what the social worker does. Hence the problem with outlandish and absurd thought experiments. Like I said before:

 

Try again.

Post Script:

 

I should also point out another issue in your test- the social worker has no expressed knowledge (unless it was hidden in your unedited introduction) about the living conditions of Brandy.

 

So the question is... do we... talk to Mary?

 

We're happy to test UPB, but you've got to prepare your test better, or have someone help you edit it. Sorry about the disability.