Hypotheticals and RPGers...

[seawasp]

So my good online friend burger_eater  posted this question on his LJ today. (Summary: your only child, a 5 year old girl, has been turned to a vampire without warning, and without knowledge of how. Knowing she'll live forever as a child will you turn yourselves into vampires to care for her?

My response was: 

Too too too many variables in that to answer. I need the specs on the type ov vampire, variations base on age (do you get stronger as you age, etc), position of vampires in society, existence or not of organization surrounding either or both vampires and hunters, etc., etc., and so on. Without that, reasonable answers range from "Hell yeah, we're changing!" to staking my own daughter out of mercy and necessity. And I do have a 6 year old daughter who was five only a week ago.

burger_eater responded with "you can't find out that information", and the discussion went a couple on in that vein.

I sensed some frustration there in that I think he felt it was a chilling but fairly clear choice one way or the other. To me, though, any such hypothetical can't be presented that way, because the decision is predicated on the precise details of the situation. This may come from the fact that I've been a roleplaying gamer (RPGer) for... um... 34 years now. Present me with a character-type choice, I'll analyze it the way I would playing the game. I want to know the rules. I want the stats of my opposition. I want to know the limits and advantages of the choices. It's like asking "would you throw the switch on a condemned prisoner"? Some people may answer "yes" automatically, and others may answer "no" automatically, but I'll answer "What was he condemned for? Do I think he got a raw deal on the trial? Why am I in the position of throwing the switch -- what's my authority?" and so on.

In that specific case, of course, he presented it in a context that is a VERY strong emotional one for any parent. As I pointed out, I *have* a little girl about that age, and so making a snap decision about how to address it just wouldn't EVER happen. I'd exhaust all possible resources to address and define the problem before making any decisions.

How many others out there are like me? Or are most of you more able to block out the questions and just answer the hypotheticals as framed?

Comments

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

Here is my answer. http://burger-eater.livejournal.com/822819.html?thread=4119331#t4119331

[melchar.livejournal.com]

My problem with this question are - [1] so the kidlet is changed. Does this mean that they will be able to learn and grow mentally? [Because if not, IMO it would be kinder to stake them.] & [2] if you go get changed yourself, the easiest source of nourishment for the child is gone. Better to stay human and provide sustinence.

[aardy.livejournal.com]

[1] burger_eater's original post posited that the kidling will remain 5 for eternity or until staked and be unable to ever learn to care for herself. I think that changes things a lot (enough that I know what my hypothetical "if none of these extenuating circumstances are true" answer would be), but the setup still needs more explanation to elicit a proper answer.

Actually, there was a character in the Wild Cards novels ("Sprout", I think) who was exactly like that, just nonvampiric. (Eternally five, never growing physically or mentally.)

[anton-p-nym.livejournal.com]

I very rarely accept hypothetical questions as-asked, because too often they're asked without nuance. In those cases I too tend to ask for particulars or set out different cases and possible reactions to said cases.

The rare time I do answer straightly a hypothetical question as-asked I seem to startle the asker. I get the feeling my motivations don't match those of a lot of other folks.

-- Steve, for instance, was asked how much money it would take for him to perform a certain humiliating act... and when he answered that dignity was more important than cash, because sufficient cash can be obtained by other means without degrading onself, the room went completely silent.

[aardy.livejournal.com]

I'm with you, though maybe not quite to the same degree.

There's a massive problem with the hypothetical as posed-- if you assume a "classical" vampire, turning requires death & burial; there's no "suddenly", there's no "no one else knows", etc. However, once you posit a nonclassical vampire (and the "crosses & religious symbols don't affect her" also moves the situation in that direction), then more information is required to outline the situation. Otherwise, it's an unfair, loaded question that's nearly on the level of "When did you stop beating your wife?"

Also, I've read both "I Am Legend" and "Interview with the Vampire", and so have ample "primary" evidence, as it were, for there being multiple acceptible ways of handling the potential for child vampires that are entirely dependent on the precise nature of the situation.

[leecetheartist.livejournal.com]

Question, question, question!

[pedanther]

I respond to a lot of hypotheticals by pointing out that to get me into the situation described, you'd have to change me so much that I'd become a different person whose decision-making criteria the me being asked the question has no special insight into.

At first glance, I think this is one of those questions. I'm having trouble picturing the scenario, not so much because of the bit where there are vampires as of the bit where I have children.

[chuk-g.livejournal.com]

I can answer a hypothetical without requiring absolutely all the detail that I require for real life situations, but not when they are as vague as this one. *Way* too many possibilities in this one.

Vampires *do* totally range from "basically superheroes" to "always evil monsters". (Note that I also have a five year old daughter IRL. I'm thinking even the superhero type vampire might not be good with your typical five year old's level of moral development & awareness of consequences).

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

Well, at least there wouldn't be any hurry about deciding. Depending on how old you are, you could remain unchanged for years while researching and mulling.

[sinanju.livejournal.com]

I agree--way too many unknown variables in this hypothetical. The need to ask questions may be rooted in being a gamer (I certainly am and I have that same need to dig for more info on the decision), but it's one I'd like a lot more people to have. Especially writers. And especially writers of tv and movie scripts, who all too often show this same lack of interest in asking the next logical question.

It's Complex

[tamahori]

Given the situation I'm trending towards 'mercy killing' for the reasons in http://burger-eater.livejournal.com/822819.html?thread=4119331#t4119331 but yeah, there is a lot more that I'd need to know for this to give a useful answer.

Most hypothetical questions tend to be overly simple to give a useful answer, or, in my experience, are deliberately set up to force an answer (see: ticking time bomb torture questions) so I don't always trust them.

So it's not just you.

-- Brett

[nuranar.livejournal.com]

Certainly ask for more information! I do not enjoy questions like this with so many unknowns. For all my admittedly (mostly) black and white view of the universe, the moral compass isn't always apparent from one or two facts. And I always want to know the complete story anyway.

[cateagle.livejournal.com]

That's not a snap decision to be made without learning and weighing all the facts you can amass and collect; it's way too complex a decision to be made in a snap unless time permits nothing else. If time did force an immediate decision, I'd likely be second-guessing myself for a good while thereafter as I studied the subject all I could.

[elainegrey.livejournal.com]

I find hypotheticals where the posing party is unwilling to help work out the details to be utterly maddening.

[johnkzin.livejournal.com]

I'm with you. The details matter.

Is this like the Vampire stories where the original person isn't really there anymore, their soul is gone and replaced with the soul of a demon? only the memories remain?

Stake her. That's not my daughter anymore, it's a demon using my daughter's body.

Is it like vampire stories where the original soul is there, just in a body with different properties? Can she control herself? Can she find nourishment in non-human blood? without killing the source? does it have to come from the warm body?

That doesn't sound like I'd stake her. That doesn't mean it'll be easy to deal with, but ... it's still my daughter.

Without more details than that given up front ... there isn't an easy answer.

[groblek.livejournal.com]

I'm with you - the details are important. That said, I'd lead towards studying what the costs to me are of being turned, and if it didn't result in my being enslaved to another's will, I'd likely choose to become a vampire to guarantee me enough time to carry out my new life project - hunting down and eradicating who/whatever did this. My reaction to a lot of these sort of hypothetical situations tends to involve a new life goal of planning revenge on who or whatever forced me into a position where I had to make that choice.

[ross-teneyck.livejournal.com]

If I have the option of deliberately being "turned" into a vampire, how is it that I can't get any information on what the nature of vampires is?

In general, I agree that there are too many unknowns to make a decision immediately. But, as Lazarus Long once said, never make decisions in haste that don't need to be made in haste. There's probably time to gather some data.

It seems to me that the first priority is figuring out what and how to feed her. Presumably she needs blood, but... does she subsist only on blood, or is it like a dietary supplement? How much blood? How often? Does it have to be human blood? Does it have to be fresh blood?

Actually I take that back: the first priority is figuring out sunlight. Does it set her on fire? Burn her painfully? Weaken her powers, whatever they may be? Make her sparkle? Or nothing? A trip to Home Depot to buy window-blocking material may be necessary.

After that, figure out food.

Next, probably, is let's call them "behavioral issues." Is she a mindless bloodthirsty monster, who will uncontrollably attack anyone around when she's hungry? Can she restrain her appetites in order to "pass," and if so, what are the limits of her self-control?

After that, what are her powers and weaknesses? Strength? Speed? Can she turn into a bat, wolf, or fog? Can she read or control minds? Can she levitate or fly? Is she vulnerable to or restrained by anything -- religious symbols, Italian cooking, roses, running water, etc.?

All of these are things that would need to be figured out before I could make an informed decision. However, I can say a couple of things:

If it turns out that she really is the "can never mentally grow or develop" type of vampire, then... well, OK, I probably can imagine a worse hell, but that one is right up there. I don't know if it warrants a mercy staking in and of itself, but... brr.

If it turns out that she must murder to live -- she has to have human blood, and she has to kill her victims -- then she cannot be suffered to live. As gut-wrenching as it would be, I couldn't put the life of my daughter over the lives of an endless series of innocent people slaughtered to feed her hunger.

Absent either of those two cases, we could probably work out some kind of way of living. I would be hard-pressed, however, to think of a scenario where I would accept being turned, assuming that vampirism works like pretty much any fictional interpretation of it I can think of. They're pretty much all fates worse than death.

[roseembolism.livejournal.com]

I've always hated hypotheticals that require binary answers without nuance. We are analog creatures, not computers.

[shanejayell.livejournal.com]

You HAVE to know the context to make a decision.

[gil-liant.livejournal.com]

Alternatively, if they refuse to supply the context, just make your own up to make it easy on yourself and provide the answer accordingly. After all, they can hardly say your context is wrong if they refuse to supply the correct context.

For example, to the sample question above: "Since all vampires are soulless creatures from Hell without any redeeming features of any kind, my little girl was murdered some time ago and I would stake the beast wearing her visage without hesitation. What? You say we're not talking about that kind of vampire? But when I asked you a moment ago, you refused to say that! What are you trying to pull?" ^_^

[arcadiagt5.livejournal.com]

In my case it is partly experience as a Business Analyst that would make me seek more information, so no it's not just you.

[gil-liant.livejournal.com]

It is easy to block out extraneous information and answer any hypothetical -- however it is often the case that the answer is "I don't know" or "There's not enough information to decide".

It seems a fallacy to assume that all these people who ask hypothetical questions know what they are doing and are capable of asking a complete, and fair, hypothetical. Crafting a legitimate 'thought-experiment' may well require as much care and intelligent design as crafting an actual, legitimate scientific experiment. Most people don't invest the skull-sweat, so why should I? ^_^

I also, in the case where I feel the question as presented does have enough information for an answer, don't feel constrained by my answer when the asker then changes the circumstances in response. After all, it's make-believe, and if they feel free to change the circumstances, I will feel equally free to change my answer. ^_^ If they say "You have to make your decision based only on the information you have right now. There is no opportunity to gain additional info," then fine. Take your best swing at it without guilt, or refuse to answer. (Unless they are paying you. ^_^ Then, you probably owe them the best answer you have.) If you want to point out that more information from them would get them a better answer, feel free. ^_^

[dsrtao]

Oh, there are so many kinds of vampire... questions must be asked. Responses will vary all over.

[caper-est.livejournal.com]

In this case as in most of its kind, I find the framing constraints too absurd to consider. "Vampire turns my five-year-old daughter," or even, "the Man in the Moon climbs down my chimney and tries to sell me a used time machine," sure.

"Know all the conditions in advance so I can decide on them, and know also I can't ever find out more?"

The me who is capable of having even that one belief, is not capable of being me. The asker is licked before he starts. Though since there exist people who can believe such things, I guess it isn't an idle question, either.

[nebroadwe.livejournal.com]

I'm with everyone who asks for context on hypotheticals. In fact, I once irritated a lawyer voir-dire-ing me during jury duty for just that reason; his hypothetical -- "Would you sue the landlord of an apartment building if your mother was injured in a slip-and-fall accident on one of its sidewalks?" -- left out all kinds of things I would have wanted to take into account, such as how the accident took place, whether the landlord had a history of negligence or not, how bad the injury was, and whether this particular slip-and-fall constituted a suing matter by law. "It depends" evidently wasn't a good answer. (I've never served on a jury yet, though I actually wouldn't mind doing so. I think it would be interesting.)

Hell, no!

[orangemike.livejournal.com]

Without context, it's worse than meaningless!

[burger-eater.livejournal.com]

The antagonism inherent in RPG interactions (in which you have a scenario in front of you that you have to best in some way) misses the point of a question like this. I'm not a GM and there are no XP at stake here. It's not an opportunity to rules-lawyer a situation or demand information the decider doesn't have.

For instance, several people have been talking about demons and souls, but the whole point of having the child unaffected by religious symbols is to take that sort of easy moral certitude off the table. That didn't stop people from turning immediately to euthanasia for quality of life issues.

Also, people need to make all sorts of difficult decisions without knowing exactly what will come from it. You've read Child of Fire and will probably not be surprised to hear that I'm interested in the way people make decisions based on imperfect information. In a way, stripping away easy predictability of the outcomes changes the hypothetical from a less interesting question (How would you maximize happiness in this situation?) to one that interests me more (What seems to be the right thing to do?)

Which is why the gamer/genre tendency to argue the rules ("Vampires such as you describe should be extinct!" "I'm going to uncover the secret vampire subculture!") misses the point, which is to ask: Would you give over your life to care for your own child? Would you risk taking on her illness in the hopes of protecting her, whatever that might mean?

The "gamer" response loses you a chance for self-examination and self-reflection.

[remus-shepherd.livejournal.com]

misses the point, which is to ask: Would you give over your life to care for your own child? Would you risk taking on her illness in the hopes of protecting her, whatever that might mean?

If that's the core question that whoever intended to ask, they should have done so in a less emotionally-charged way. The word 'vampire' evokes strong imagery and emotions.

Try this: A nanotech experiment has escaped from a laboratory and infected some of the populace, including your daughter. Nobody knows what the nanites are doing to these people. It is likely to change their bodies and their minds in unknown ways, but nobody knows how. The infection is not contagious but it can be transmitted between willing participants. What do you do?

I think the answer here is very clear; without the connotations of demonic presenses and immortality, it's plain that your daughter is sick and you should care for her, but acquiring her illness yourself just to better understand her condition is idiotic. If it detrimentally affects your mind, how will that help you help her?

But maybe that's just my perspective, and as I said before any excuse to stake five-year-olds is okay by me.