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

[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?" ^_^

[houseboatonstyx.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.

Apparently this began as a different discussion elsewhere. But just as a general thing, if someone poses a hypothetical in casual conversation, then it may be for the sake of seeing what context the responder makes up.

[gil-liant.livejournal.com]

True, but this came up in the context of not being able to answer hypotheticals with inadequate context. Typically my goal isn't to deny the questioner information so much as be able (to the best of my ability) to fulfill their request while remaining true to myself.

I absolutely agree that by supplying context I might well reveal much more about myself than if I simply offered a response to the question in its original form. The most secure way to answer a hypothetical question is always. "No comment. We'll have to see what happens if the situtation actually comes up."