Pages: 1 2 3

 

2008-02-24 20:09:47
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6558|North Tonawanda, NY
I was talking with a friend earlier today, and he brought up this interesting moral dilemma.  It shows just how easy it is to place blame on the victim.

Suppose there is this situation:

A Duke leaves his castle for the weekend, and tells his wife to stay within the castle walls.  He independently commands the guards to kill anyone who tries to enter the castle while he is away.  The Duchess leaves for a secret rendezvous with her lover outside the castle.  When she tries to get back into the castle the next morning, the drawbridge has been lifted and she doesn't have a way to cross the moat.  She goes into to town, and tries rent a boat from a fisherman, only to realize she has no money.  She then goes to a friend's house, and asks her if she could borrow money to hire the boat.  The friend refuses, and tells her that she should live with her mistake.  She then goes back to the moat, and tries to swim across.  The guard tells her that if she continues, he will have to kill her.  She proceeds, and the guard kills her.

Order the six people (Duke, Duchess, The Lover, The Guard, The Fisherman, and The Friend) in order from most to least blame they have for her death, and why.
2008-02-24 20:12:02
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6953|South Florida
Umm..


What?
15 more years! 15 more years!
2008-02-24 20:13:42
Des.Kmal
Member
+917|7046|Atlanta, Georgia, USA
dutchess.
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
2008-02-24 20:15:14
HurricaИe
Banned
+877|6389|Washington DC
Duke - He picked a crappy wife + I'm assuming he didn't tell her that the guards were to shoot on sight
Duchess - Didn't follow her husband's warning
The Guard - He shot the bitch even though he probably knew it was the duchess, but he WAS following the orders of the duke
After that, the last three are all equally low in blame. The lover must be an animal in the sack if he Duchess is screwing him... cause I doubt he's more powerful than the duke. The friend was a bit of a dick but I doubt he knew she'd be killed. And the fisherman didn't do shit, so he's exempt.
2008-02-24 20:15:43
geNius
..!.,
+144|6870|SoCal

Des.Kmal wrote:

dutchess.
https://srejects.com/genius/srejects.png
2008-02-24 20:28:46
Havok
Nymphomaniac Treatment Specialist
+302|7102|Florida, United States

Most guilty: Dutchess.  She was cheating on her husband and then violated his orders.  She caused her own death by continuing her path when she was explicitly told she would be killed.
Next guilty: Lover.  He caused the Dutchess to violate her husband's orders and cheat on her husband.  He's less guilty because he didn't force the Dutchess to do anything, just promoted it.
Next guilty: Duke.  He created an environment that his wife found unsuitable, causing her to cheat and violate his orders.  The wife could have sorted out the problems instead of simply violating orders and cheating.
Next guilty: Guard.  He was doing his job, but he still murdered her.  He's much less guilty than the Dutchess, Duke, and Lover though.
Next guilty: Friend.  She should have loaned her friend the money because that's what friends do.
Last guilty: Fisherman.  Did nothing wrong.

That's how I feel.  The Lover and Duke are almost equally guilty, but the Dutchess is by far the most guilty.
2008-02-24 20:33:11
RandomSchl
|\/|€|\/|߀|2
+52|6871|California
How can the fisherman get blamed? Why would he give someone a boat who had no money?
2008-02-24 20:37:53
Havok
Nymphomaniac Treatment Specialist
+302|7102|Florida, United States

RandomSchl wrote:

How can the fisherman get blamed? Why would he give someone a boat who had no money?
[alternative perspective]He could have been a good Samaritan and given her a ride for free because he probably knew she would be killed if he didn't.[/alternative perspective]

That's why this game sucks.  If the world was ideal, the fisherman would be guilty.  But it isn't, so he's not.
2008-02-24 20:42:50
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|7135|67.222.138.85
Duchess - She's an idiot
the rest - not their fault, kudos to the guard for following orders
2008-02-24 20:44:12
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6752|New Haven, CT
Duchess
Lover
Duke
Guard
Friend
Fisherman
2008-02-24 20:44:50
Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|7119|Calgary
there is only one person to blame, and that is the wife. Blaming other people for ones fault is a joke ( however, thousands of liability lawyers would disagree)
2008-02-24 20:47:51
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6752|New Haven, CT
To be honest, to scale it.

Duchess


















Lover

Duke
Guard-Friend-Fishermen

The last three have no guilt at all.
2008-02-24 20:49:13
David.P
Banned
+649|6701
Duchess.

The lover did not force her to come.

The duke's orders were direct.

The guard was just following them.

The friend was trying to make her realize what sh was doing was wrong.

The Fisherman cannot be blamed for anything because he's just trying to run a business because the Duke taxes him.
2008-02-24 20:54:06
~FuzZz~
.yag era uoy fi siht deaR
+422|6750|Orrstrayleea

Havok wrote:

Most guilty: Dutchess.  She was cheating on her husband and then violated his orders.  She caused her own death by continuing her path when she was explicitly told she would be killed.
Next guilty: Lover.  He caused the Dutchess to violate her husband's orders and cheat on her husband.  He's less guilty because he didn't force the Dutchess to do anything, just promoted it.
Next guilty: Duke.  He created an environment that his wife found unsuitable, causing her to cheat and violate his orders.  The wife could have sorted out the problems instead of simply violating orders and cheating.
Next guilty: Guard.  He was doing his job, but he still murdered her.  He's much less guilty than the Dutchess, Duke, and Lover though.
Next guilty: Friend.  She should have loaned her friend the money because that's what friends do.
Last guilty: Fisherman.  Did nothing wrong.

That's how I feel.  The Lover and Duke are almost equally guilty, but the Dutchess is by far the most guilty.
2008-02-24 20:54:43
SharkyMcshark
I'll take two
+132|7213|Perth, Western Australia
Dutchess - her fault for having a lover on the side
Duke - what a fantastically stupid order
Friend - what an asshat of a friend
Guard - discretion for the win

after this a long long gap, and the below don't really shoulder much of the blame, but hey I have to rank all six don't I?


Lover - so you're telling me that if a princess threw herself at you you wouldn't tap it?
Fisherman - did nothing wrong

EDIT: swapped fisherman and lover. While those people putting him up as high as second ought to get their heads checked, he does shoulder a portion of the blame as the cause of her leaving the castle.

Last edited by SharkyMcshark (2008-02-24 20:56:12)

2008-02-24 20:55:04
S.Lythberg
Mastermind
+429|6874|Chicago, IL

nukchebi0 wrote:

To be honest, to scale it.

Duchess


















Lover

Duke
Guard-Friend-Fishermen

The last three have no guilt at all.
QFT, Duke was kinda bossy, but his suspicions were right after all...
2008-02-24 20:55:15
Locoloki
I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!
+216|7068|Your moms bedroom

SenorToenails wrote:

I was talking with a friend earlier today, and he brought up this interesting moral dilemma.  It shows just how easy it is to place blame on the victim.
Do you have a better example? this scenario shows that the victim got exactly what she deserved for commiting adultry (being a ho)
2008-02-24 20:56:35
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6752|New Haven, CT

SenorToenails wrote:

I was talking with a friend earlier today, and he brought up this interesting moral dilemma.  It shows just how easy it is to place blame on the victim.
People bring bad things upon themselves when they do dumb things.
2008-02-24 20:58:52
SharkyMcshark
I'll take two
+132|7213|Perth, Western Australia

Locoloki wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

I was talking with a friend earlier today, and he brought up this interesting moral dilemma.  It shows just how easy it is to place blame on the victim.
Do you have a better example? this scenario shows that the victim got exactly what she deserved for commiting adultry (being a ho)
Adultery = death?

shit, get usmarine and lowing in here, Locoloki is beginning to sound like a representative of a particular religion that they don't like very much...

Last edited by SharkyMcshark (2008-02-24 20:59:46)

2008-02-24 21:06:23
RandomSchl
|\/|€|\/|߀|2
+52|6871|California

Havok wrote:

RandomSchl wrote:

How can the fisherman get blamed? Why would he give someone a boat who had no money?
[alternative perspective]He could have been a good Samaritan and given her a ride for free because he probably knew she would be killed if he didn't.[/alternative perspective]

That's why this game sucks.  If the world was ideal, the fisherman would be guilty.  But it isn't, so he's not.
how would the fisherman know that she would be killed?? It never says the Duke announces to his entire kingdom no one can come in. I don't think a lowly fisherman would be involved in castle affairs (lol that word is used two ways)

Last edited by RandomSchl (2008-02-24 21:06:39)

2008-02-24 21:10:43
Locoloki
I got Mug 222 at Gritty's!!!!
+216|7068|Your moms bedroom
Ill can come up with a better moral dilemna than this
2008-02-24 21:42:38
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6558|North Tonawanda, NY

Locoloki wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:

I was talking with a friend earlier today, and he brought up this interesting moral dilemma.  It shows just how easy it is to place blame on the victim.
Do you have a better example? this scenario shows that the victim got exactly what she deserved for commiting adultry (being a ho)

Locoloki wrote:

Ill can come up with a better moral dilemna than this
The point of this is that it is ambiguous.  Everyone played a role, and there are clear lines of guilt.  That is why this is a good thought experiment.
2008-02-24 21:45:57
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6558|North Tonawanda, NY

Havok wrote:

RandomSchl wrote:

How can the fisherman get blamed? Why would he give someone a boat who had no money?
[alternative perspective]He could have been a good Samaritan and given her a ride for free because he probably knew she would be killed if he didn't.[/alternative perspective]

That's why this game sucks.  If the world was ideal, the fisherman would be guilty.  But it isn't, so he's not.
You can't make that assumption.  The Duke's order to kill was given in secret.

The fisherman could have loaned her the boat knowing she was the duchess, but he insisted on getting payment.  Whether or not that is guilt is up to your perception.  This is not an idealized situation at all.
2008-02-24 21:49:30
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6558|North Tonawanda, NY

David.P wrote:

Duchess.

The lover did not force her to come.

The duke's orders were direct.

The guard was just following them.

The friend was trying to make her realize what sh was doing was wrong.

The Fisherman cannot be blamed for anything because he's just trying to run a business because the Duke taxes him.
Why does that make the lover more to blame than the duke or anyone else?  He didn't know she would be killed.  The Duke, however, knew there was some possibility that she would end up dead.
2008-02-24 22:00:02
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6558|North Tonawanda, NY
I thought of it this way:

Duke:  Hired the guard to kill his wife, even if she had to meet a certain criteria to die.
Guard:  Hired by the Duke to kill his wife.
Lover:  Was in an affair with a married woman who has much more to lose than himself.
Duchess:  Was having an affair.
Friend:  Can't be expected to bail out a friend, and didn't know her life was at stake.
Fisherman:  Just running a business.

While the Duchess certainly did some stupid stuff, the Duke went overboard in commanding her execution.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard