I think it's often a game of semantics and catch-phrases when heavily-loaded words like "abortion" is thrown out there. Often times we have a predisposition to the word but not the instances that incorporate it. Often time the instances are horrible cliched: "It's okay as long as she got raped!" I think it's interesting that testicles voted straight down the line with the same answer. It's fine if you have a pre-disposition to save your wife over your child. But the one thing that is perhaps not clearly evoked is the guilt that should be felt for making such a choice. Essentially even if your wife lives, it may be cost you the relationship as you betrayed her when she really wanted to have this baby. The exercise was partially a test on sympathy. Often times we are conceited by our own opinions that we allow them to supercede and take precedence over other people's choices. I find it interesting that people found "Ms. Perfect" as a type of treasure that should be coveted and is something that will last. Perhaps our greed overshadows our ability to perceive the inner fragility of other people. Or perhaps even if we can perceive inner fragility, our ego determines that analytical explanation to other people is not necessary. I think it's also interesting that some men have found Ms. Perfect to hold similar beliefs and opinions to their own. Perhaps indicating narcissism, immaturity, or instability therefore leading to the necessity to fantasize a clone personality in a feminine package.
Again I intentionally wrote the prompt to be contextual, leaving a lot of the situation to be visualized and considered by the individual. The fact that responses can be analyzed as well is perhaps something that is rarely done on these little feedback situations. I know going through Khoi's threads that there is little if any social interaction going on between intermittent posts. Most of it is singular and ignorant of the next. It is reminiscent of a data bank than a social interaction, perhaps due to the impersonal nature of the questionnaire having been cut out straight from a book or a statistical survey. It remains interesting as to why people feel the compulsory need to contribute to such threads when the nature is primarily impersonal or to be used as something possibly off-reference in the future as an ad-hominem attack on character. If I phrased the original thread to be "Abortion is bad" I wonder if I would get more responses. Perhaps the statistical percentages and the multiple spoilers intimidated people and gave off the impression as if they were taking a test. Perhaps the insinuated instance that there might be a "right answer" or "wrong" answer led to lack-luster explanations of why you get to play god and condemn one life while you save another. Perhaps the fact that you don't necessarily kill anyone "100%" or save someone "100%" leads to a lack of guilt or explanation in being expressed. Most instances in life hardly involve 100% chances as diseases like cancer are ravaging and have a low possibility of proper treatment. If you treat your wife for lung cancer, then how much longer will she have left? Is there enough time to have another child. Again we assume what we want to assume because it is part of who we are as people and a part of our personality / immaturity. The important part is to question those assumptions. Why do we assume that she'll still be healthy after cured? Is it because those medical dramas often cut off with the patient recovering, smiling, and having some classy wine with the rest of their family just in time for Thanksgiving. Or are there deeper reasons that we have experienced as individuals that make us individually unique that give us this personal bias when it comes down to decision making.
When it comes down to social interaction and human ingenuity, I am left with the impression that this is it. Two sentences to explain why you are killing your loved one or baby. I'm not really disillusioned. I'm just trying to illicit anger so I can actually have some type of emotional feedback. Perhaps I should expand on emotional attack tactics in order to try to dive for real responses, human responses. Or perhaps I should just give up.
Again I intentionally wrote the prompt to be contextual, leaving a lot of the situation to be visualized and considered by the individual. The fact that responses can be analyzed as well is perhaps something that is rarely done on these little feedback situations. I know going through Khoi's threads that there is little if any social interaction going on between intermittent posts. Most of it is singular and ignorant of the next. It is reminiscent of a data bank than a social interaction, perhaps due to the impersonal nature of the questionnaire having been cut out straight from a book or a statistical survey. It remains interesting as to why people feel the compulsory need to contribute to such threads when the nature is primarily impersonal or to be used as something possibly off-reference in the future as an ad-hominem attack on character. If I phrased the original thread to be "Abortion is bad" I wonder if I would get more responses. Perhaps the statistical percentages and the multiple spoilers intimidated people and gave off the impression as if they were taking a test. Perhaps the insinuated instance that there might be a "right answer" or "wrong" answer led to lack-luster explanations of why you get to play god and condemn one life while you save another. Perhaps the fact that you don't necessarily kill anyone "100%" or save someone "100%" leads to a lack of guilt or explanation in being expressed. Most instances in life hardly involve 100% chances as diseases like cancer are ravaging and have a low possibility of proper treatment. If you treat your wife for lung cancer, then how much longer will she have left? Is there enough time to have another child. Again we assume what we want to assume because it is part of who we are as people and a part of our personality / immaturity. The important part is to question those assumptions. Why do we assume that she'll still be healthy after cured? Is it because those medical dramas often cut off with the patient recovering, smiling, and having some classy wine with the rest of their family just in time for Thanksgiving. Or are there deeper reasons that we have experienced as individuals that make us individually unique that give us this personal bias when it comes down to decision making.
When it comes down to social interaction and human ingenuity, I am left with the impression that this is it. Two sentences to explain why you are killing your loved one or baby. I'm not really disillusioned. I'm just trying to illicit anger so I can actually have some type of emotional feedback. Perhaps I should expand on emotional attack tactics in order to try to dive for real responses, human responses. Or perhaps I should just give up.