Quote:
Originally Posted by Anh_Minh
Why do we need the doctor to prove that? There was a guy who was condemened when he was 5 years old.
|
Eh? I'm not asking the "good" doctor to prove anything. Rather, I'm contesting the claim that her latent criminal status proves that she was "shafted into working for the state". Two different issues and not necessarily linked, yet
ogon_bat apparently claims that one condition led to the other.
And indeed, if he wanted to assert that claim, the situation presented by the redhead enforcer would make a more compelling case.
I also drew up an alternative scenario to discuss if being locked into "working for a state" is necessarily "bad".
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf
Here's another way to re-frame the scenario as it is presented in Psycho-Pass. Supposing that I believe myself to be a moral person, and that I feel an overriding responsibility to make good moral choices. If, after subjecting myself to Sibyl Judgment, it is discovered that I have the psychological profile of a potential criminal. What would be the moral choice? Should I bulldoze ahead on a normal track, heedless of the higher-than-normal risk I present to other people, if I should make a mistake and accidentally (or perhaps even deliberately, on a subconscious level) fail to take the medication I need to stay within normal limits?
In my desire to fulfil my own emotional needs, have I failed in my moral responsibility to other people, given the knowledge that the Sibyl System has presented to me? How much "choice" do I really have in this matter?
|
Granted the redhead was probably not presented with such a choice, but let's take it he's now given the chance to consciously think about the options before him. In the light of the Sibyl Judgment, and assuming that he does indeed regard himself as a moral person, how much "choice" does he actually have?