Here's a tweeted thought experiment...
-
-
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
First proposition: A sexual encounter in the absence of informed consent is always immoral (& assault, even if it doesn't reach legal bar).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
2nd prop: Informed consent exists only if you disclose everything a reasonable person would anticipate your partner would want to know.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
A married person cheats on their spouse, doesn't inform them, and carries on having sex with them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
Is that sexual assault? If it isn't, where does the reasoning go wrong?
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
If we accept the premises, it is assault, what people will argue is the "reasonable person..." part
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Shadow_ofaDoubt
Yes, but I think almost all would agree that a person would want to know about serial cheating before putting out.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
True, but there is a difference between serial cheating and cheating once, for the sake of the experiment, assume our ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Shadow_ofaDoubt @PhilosophyExp
cheater cheated only once, and was STD tested before sleeping with their partner again, I may not think it but an ...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Shadow_ofaDoubt @PhilosophyExp
argument could be made that its not reasonable to have to disclose that
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Even if you know for certain your partner would want to know, and wouldn't have sex with you if they did know?
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.