February 20, 2004
Where do you stand on secret sex with dead chickens?
Take a chance and have a go at the Taboo test. My results are:
Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.43.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.
Your Universalising Factor is: 0.75.
Are you thinking straight about morality?
Although you do not evaluate the actions depicted in these scenarios to be across the board wrong, it is not entirely clear why you think that anything in them is morally problematic. You don't think an action can be morally wrong if it is entirely private and no one, not even the person doing the act, is harmed by it. Yet the actions described in these scenarios are private like this and it was specified as clearly as possible that they didn't involve harm. Possibly an argument could be made that the people undertaking these actions are harmed in some way by them. But you don't think that an action can be morally wrong solely for the reason that it harms the person undertaking it. More significantly, when asked about each scenario, in no instance did you respond that harm had resulted. Consequently, it is a puzzle why you think that any of the actions depicted here are questionable morally speaking.
Hmmm, I think much of the discrepancy comes from my inclination to take into account what my reaction would have been to some of the scenarios had I been an observer. I'm sorry but a country where it's normal for people to have secret sex with dead chickens does bother me a touch. Call me old fashioned.
