undefined | Better HN

0 pointsaziaziazi22d ago0 comments

Your dog's exemples are fair, we align on that.

unnatural argument is to be ignored IMHO, it does't makes sense outside our emotional feeling and has multiple (and contradictory) interpretation so you'll end up arguing on each cases and don't have a rule/framework.

A thought experiment from Jonathan Haidt:

> Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on summer vacation from college. One night they are stay- ing alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At the very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide not to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret, which makes them feel even closer to each other. What do you think about that? Was it OK for them to make love?

edit: Confusing story isn't it ? Here's an short but thorough analyse https://www.kevindorst.com/uploads/8/8/1/7/88177244/haidt_20...

0 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

0 comments

benj11122d ago

I'm not saying unnatural is a good position. It is at least consistent with the attitudes we see.

Re the thought experiment. The standard argument is that of birth defects, which is obviously avoided. You could point to evolutionary pressures for the taboo also.

The thing is, kind of like pedophilia we've drawn a hard line. You could make the argument that someone the day before their 16th birthday is the same as the day after, therefore it's ok. I think the line being clear has more utility than the alternative. In this situation we're being invited to redraw a line, but where to put it? Do we make the getting pregnant illegal? Not being careful enough? So I would keep the line where it is.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse