There are some circumstances under which there's a middle part, but they're uncommon.
Consider Christian Bale's roles in the two Chris Nolan Batman movies. I've heard it argued, and have decided I agree, that he really plays three separate roles in those films: 1. Bruce Wayne as himself; 2. The Batman, as a character played by Bruce Wayne, which Bruce intends to have a specific effect on wrong-doers; 3. Bruce Wayne the billionaire playboy (Bruce', maybe), as a character played by Bruce Wayne, which Bruce intends to have a specific effect on the public at large. If we did this in a real world setting, it might look like this: 1. Kid presents as a 30 year old man so he can close real estate deals; 2. As the 30 year old man, he has associations with, let's say, a criminal element, and colludes with them to represent himself as a kid for the purpose of closing a crooked deal. (Doesn't matter what the specific mechanism is.) The ethical linkage is still direct from the kid-avatar to the kid. But it doesn't directly collapse, because he's also lied to his (criminal) associates about being an adult, so there's an ethical issue there that doesn't collapse. So I think whether it "collapses" or not depends on whether anyone gets a chance to know it's happening: Do you know whether you're being screwed-over by a 15 year old kid, or a 30 year old real estate guy? I think stuff like this probably happens in WoW on a regular basis. I know it happens on message boards. SL, I don't know, because I don't think there's any incentive for it. It gets complicated. But I don't think it's as complicated as it seems: Ultimately there's still a person who's culpable. There's still a direct connection -- it just happens to pass through several layers, and maybe picks up some intensity in the process. Ultimately, that would be my point: Ethically, isolating behind multiple layers would probably be worse than just screwing someone directly. On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Sal Armoniac <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jason. I think I misunderstood what you were saying both times. > > Goofy and Santa Claus. I haven't been to Disneyworld, ever, but I've been > to Disneyland, and Goofy never touched me. He waved. I am under the > impression that Goofy (with the man inside who is playing him) has been > instructed never to touch a child unless the child approaches and the > parents consent. For decades, Santa Claus sat in a chair and parents let > their children sit on his knee and tell him what they wanted for Christmas. > I have not been privy to this custom lately as I don't have kids, but I > imagine that the new (and almost paranoid) consciousness about pedarasts > disallows this practice these days. I mean, maybe these guys are perverts > and are getting off touching children!!!!! I think this is a terrible > shame. A man may love children and feel a strong affection for them without > getting sexually aroused by them. To assume him guilty ahead of time puts > the burden on the many for the crimes of the few. > > Layers of avatars. I agree that that's not possible except in fiction > (imagine a story in which an avatar, driven by a real human, were to find a > virtual computer in which he/she logs on to a virtual virtual world and > makes an avatar... ad infinitum. This would all still be governed by the > real human, unless the avatar acquired, Kurweil-wise, an intelligence and > will of its own. ) > > But the philosophical question you posed had me stumped and I conceived of > it incorrectly: if the 15-year-old has a 37 year old avatar and then comes > in as a fifteen year old girl, then she has two avatars. You can't as yet > have an avatar have an avatar. In Second Life you can change your shape > drastically, so that if your default avatar is a female (such as mine), you > can put on the shape and clothing of a male, or a furry, or a dolphin, or a > flying cat or a mollusc, but you would still have your original name hanging > over your head and people would know who you are. I suppose that's the > closest one could come to an example about an avatar having an avatar, but > most residents would merely assume that you are experimenting with the > shape-option technology in Second Life and that you're the same person. > > So, Jason, there isn't a middle part. You are right. > > Sarah > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Jason Olshefsky > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Oct 25, 2010, at 1:48 PM, Sal Armoniac wrote: >> > Goofy at Disneyland is a good example ... so the 28 year old man is >> really only acting; he is engaging, for a fee, the crowds of people only as >> Goofy and not as himself. Whether he feels liberated hugging children is >> irrelevant to the job >> >> I was actually considering the feelings of the parents of the children -- >> in the sense that the mask makes abhorrent behavior desirable. (Clearly >> referring to the subset of parents who'd find a 28-year-old male >> reciprocating warm, loving gestures with a child they have never met >> abhorrent; I think most parents' knee-jerk reaction today is to think that >> behavior is risky or dangerous.) Tangentially relating to the other >> example, if an adult makes a child persona for interacting with other >> children online, the scenario is considerable different. Thus, it's not the >> nature of the mask per se as it is the intent of the puppeteer -- or rather, >> the perceived intent of the puppeteer. >> >> It appears to me that I was unintentionally derailing the conversation >> toward one of how the law perceives chronological age. So let me step away >> from that. My other example weakly had to do with the idea of avatars to >> further be puppeteers of other avatars in that I realized a complex layer of >> avatars wasn't really feasible (as I said in my example about an engineer >> operating [I'm shocked "puppet" isn't also a verb] an interpretive dance >> avatar versus me operating an engineer avatar operating a dance avatar >> collapsing to me operating the dance avatar directly). I was going >> off-topic with an example of a human 15-year-old girl creating a 37-year-old >> male persona online which then creates its own 15-year-old girl persona. >> >> ---Jason Olshefsky >> http://JayceLand.com/ <http://jayceland.com/> >> http://JayceLand.com/blog/ <http://jayceland.com/blog/> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<r-spec%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en. > -- -- eric scoles | [email protected] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en.
