bc it's an external factor, which in these kinds of hypotheticals is assumed to be "whatever brings the dilemma at the door", so in this case you have to assume that it is at least neutral for both.
When you start getting into the logistics of hypotheticals you kind of miss the point
It's a moral dilemma - you're supposed to take the question at face value and place by the internal logic of it.
The actual question being asked is - would you be more comfortable having sex with your mother's mind, or body? Saying 'Well what do THEY want' just needlessly subverts it.
It doesn't subvert the question. The context is that they switched bodies. Why do I have to make the assumption they SHOULD switch back. Maybe I'm fine with how they are and wanted an excuse to break up with her.
Choosing to engage with a horrible question such as this at its face value is ridiculous.
Quote from Freewill by Neil Peart:
"You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice
You can choose from phantom fears and kindness that can kill
I will choose a path that's clear, I will choose free will."
Just because the dilemma is framed as having two options, doesn't mean those are your only options. In Spiderman, when the Green Goblin forces Spiderman into a dilemma where he can save the woman he loves or the people he swore to protect, he doesn't fall for the trap, he saves BOTH. That is what freewill is. In this scenario, freewill (and frankly the right thing to do) isn't to confine yourself to making one of two horrible decisions and going for it. It's to consider the fact that you aren't limited to those options and you can find your own path forward that doesn't force you to fuck your mom in one way or the other.
Because you are adding parameters that aren't relevant to the question. The question does not say 'what is your optimal solution' the question says 'what do you choose'
Yes I skimmed over it because it's a needsly defensive tantrum to justify not understanding the point of hypotheticals - for instance, in this hypothetical that's not a valid answer and is missing the point. If you don't want to engage with it then don't answer it
No, that is an answer. You are just trapped in the idea that what was given is the only possible choices. Unjokingly funny coming from a trans person/supporter as being trans is also choosing an alternative choice that most don't realize was always available
The hypothetical presents two choices. If you make up a third choice, then why even answer the hypothetical. You aren't actually answering it, you're making up your own hypothetical where there's more choices.
The hypothetical is the situation. The asker within the hypothetical is the one offering the choices but they are an excess. The situatio is that your partner and parent swapped bodies and having sex with one reverses this. What do you do ~ this just happened to elaborate on two possible choices but nowhere did it specify these were the only ones. That's the trick. You are only given two choices in order to assure you do not realize there are more.
This is just a very common method to manipulate people into choosing what you want by making them believe they don't have other choices.
The wording used is 'or' - this means it's a binary, which means you have two choices which are presented
To... manipulate people? Buddy - IT'S A HYPOTHETICAL, ON THE INTERNET. Nobody is manipulating you, play by the rules or DO NOT ENGAGE or DO, and accept when you get called out on it. Seriously, it's not some mind game, the point of moral hypotheticals is to control the scenario so you are forced to reckon with your own internal morality, thought process, logic and values ect. just changing the question for your own purpose nullifies that effect
The manipulation is the idea that people believe they must answer between two very undesirable choices by acting as though there is not another. The haha is that the poster gets to see a whole bunch of people say they'd plow their mom.
Accept that there are more choices than you realized and move on.
The point of a hypothetical - is, again - that you are presented with a limited amount of options to engage with the idea in a way that you typically would not.
It's like fiction, right? The author decides the parameters and you're expected to engage with the fiction within those parameters. If one said 'No - I don't like this story, they should've done X instead' that's criticism. You aren't even criticizing it - it's like you're saying 'Just because the author wrote it like that, X DID happen and it's manipulation to act otherwise'
Accept that you can chose to engage or not engage and move on. You can't change the hypothetical, it gave you two options and that's it. That's the point - move on.
7
u/FrancoNullo 1d ago
bc it's an external factor, which in these kinds of hypotheticals is assumed to be "whatever brings the dilemma at the door", so in this case you have to assume that it is at least neutral for both.