You're Wrong About The Ethics of Amnestics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 апр 2023
- I was going to write something funny here but I forgot.
Support me via Patreon here: / dcimmerian
Check out the community discord here: / discord
Check me out on the tweeters: / dcimmerian
This work is licensed creative commons 4.0 attribution/share alike.
All SCP wiki works are licensed creative commons 3.0 attribution/share alike.
The image of Doctor Cimmerian was created by Perelka_L.
Channel art was created by TheVolgun 
Развлечения
Did you forget to write something funny in the description or did the Foundation deem your comedy skills dangerous to the security of the Veil and decide to amnesticise you?
I don't remember.
Even ignoring infohazards, there are a lot of scps that I'd imagine I'd want to be wiped from my memory - there's probably a Foundation employee who'd gladly eat a handful of amnestics but cannot because it would impede his/her work
Good take. For very similar reasons I believe that non-consensual memory manipulation in general should be considered a war crime. This of course is only applicable to fiction, but if such a thing became viable in reality I would think the same. The only justifiable uses that I can fathom are for the containment of dangerous cognitohazards and infohazards, which don’t exist is many other fictional works besides SCP.
I honestly consider amnestics to be better in most cases if they only go back a month or so [not counting for any side effects due to use of the drug] because in most cases reverting someone's memory back a month and them being severely confused is likely better than dealing with most cogitohazards for the rest of your life [if you're not shot dead]
I honestly wouldn't say its really killing unless its most of their life that was removed
I've always wanted to write an SCP that explores the tragedy that comes with amnestics. Imagine getting the person that you cared for above all else wiped from your memory. Imagine being a humanoid skip and the Foundation erasing you from the memories of everyone you knew. The latter gets mentioned often but I've never seen an article really delve into it. For me, there are only two things that are deeply horrifying: forgetting and being forgotten.
I do think an extra element of messed up here is the result of missing time. In the case of the D Class, sure they keep getting wiped back to the person they were at the start, but their body is changing without them. They're getting older, maybe testing is leaving them with scars, maybe they've even been physically changed in some other unseen manner, but the fact remains that the body they have will not be the one they remember.
It’s an interesting concept, I believe that it's all dependent on how old the memory is.
Whether they've had time to process the event and let it shape them as a person.
It’d be interesting if you touched upon the topic more, maybe write an updated Amnestic Guide?
How can I be wrong about something that I can't remember... Oh
i just realized this man has drawn his character so perfectly that is looking at me wherever i am
From a logistical perspective, most foundation employees likely have an official cover story for who they are and what they do, assuming a canon in which induction into the foundation doesn't require complete erasure from the public record. Through implantation of memories of that facade via hypnotherapy post amnesticization, the negative effects of memory loss could be mostly mitigated for retiring employees. Of course the more detailed one's personnel file was with coworker relationships, accomplishments, and notable events, the better their memory could be rehabilitated to fit the self that they had become, just scrubbed of anything anomalous. Ultimately that leaves the ethics of amnesticization completely up to the foundation's cost/benefits analysis in determining how in depth the rehabilitation process will go.
Personally though, I imagine they just nuke the former employee's mind and gaslight them into thinking they have Alzheimer's as a deterrent against employment not being a lifelong commitment
it's not killing, it's switching personalities
The thing is: we actually have cases we could study/ask that get really damn close:
Plurality (what you might know as "multiple personality disorder"), people with retrograde amnesia, certain drugs (be it that it knocks out memory directly or goes via ego death), etc.
This once again goes into "majority does 'hypothetical', that minority already lives on a regular basis"
My father-in-law is a pharmacist. Amnestics exist. Plenty of medications can interfere with the formation of new memories or cause memory loss. Especially if you mix them with other drugs or overdose.
"Monthly termination" could be a monthly detox period which also takes D-class out of their active testing rotation.
If someone forgot the experiences that caused them to develop personality traits, would they still even have those personality traits?
Physiologically speaking, the parts of the brain where personality and memory are stored are separate areas. Your core personality or self shouldn't be radically affected by memory loss. In fact, in real-world amnesia cases, the patients keep their habits and preferences, such as media tastes, they just lose their experiential memories. In extreme cases, people who had PTSD before developing amnesia still had PTSD symptoms. Changes in how they perceive the "self" may occur, but the "self" itself remains essentially the same unless directly affected by extreme experiences. I believe Dr. Not-A-Real-Doctor is assuming that the amnestics don't change the brain structure or the synaptic connections, they just remove the encoded information from those connections.
It's not just amnesia per se -- think of people who were abused as young children, and whose personality traits (such as anxiety or superstitions) were formed that young, but who by their teens no longer actually remember the many details of their trauma, and have only the effects to judge by. It's a bit like trying to figure out negative space, or a black hole, or the wind, or, well, an antimemetic idea from the effects when you can't look at the cause directly.
I don't know why I didn't expect identity death to be part of the topic of this video.
Using amnestics isn't exactly a fix-all solution as ethically you are removing the "problem" that would cause future issues.
But then paradoxes would happen internally to this person...
The fact that an organization can abuse its use, it is quite akin to giving the person a skip... but then will be also considered the double-edged sword when talking about keeping a person alive with important incriminating memories gone versus to just factory-resetting a person's totality and sense and having them either run with false or implanted memories or with none at all and just leave them in a state of " who am i".
We know that mercy-killing is an ethical tag to justify killimg actions, then utilizing amnestics falls along that double-edged paradigm of " it all depends on the beholder".
I know you probably don't have a lot of topics like this left, but it's videos like this that got me to subsribe to your channel origionaly,
It depends on how much of their memory is wiped. If you wipe yesterday from their memory, it is significantly better than being murdered. That person hasn’t changed much and it won’t be that big of a deal. I think everyone would prefer forgetting one day than being shot.
Once you’re wiping months or even years, the ethics aren’t looking good. Not sure if it’s equal to murder, but it’s pretty close. You are erasing quite a lot of that person’s self. I’d pretty much ending all relationships that person established during that time. People who know them are basically strangers now. Plus the whole thing with your personality being influenced by past events, and that person is being set up for a really bad situation.
If the entire person’s memory is being erased, that is worse than murder. You just erased that person. Their self basically does not exist. You’ve killed the person they once were. At least when someone is killed, they just die. With a full memory wipe, they’re gonna have to deal with the mental issues that comes with until their body dies. It’s an actual fate worse than death.
In my headcanon, the foundation doesn't erase the memories of people who quit or retire. I don't think it'd be necessary. If an employee can keep quiet about the foundation while they're employed, they can continue keeping quiet when they quit or retire
In fact, if an employee can keep quiet, couldn't their family keep quiet too? The foundation can erase people's memories and they basically control the world, letting employees tell their families about the foundation doesn't sound like it'd break the veil or normalcy
This brings a lot of related details to my mind. Among them:
a. The video "Enriching Lives" by Extra Credits, about Mass Effect 2 and a particular choice between killing a group and forcibly changing their minds.
b. Those thought experiments like the Ship of Theseus, and the way our bodies get replaced over time, and the casual horror underlying the Star Trek transporter.
c. The concept of the soul as "that which remains Me when everything else has been stripped away"; in particular, what makes me Me even when I no longer remember who I was yesterday. I'm relatively confident in stating that the concept of the soul -- in some fashion -- is prevalent in the SCP mythos, or else we couldn't transfer people between bodies or into objects. (Also reminds me of one of my favorite episodes of Stargate SG-1, wherein the actors got to have fun acting as their fellow actors as souls got merrily transferred back and forth.)
Because I cannot believe that one's Self is entirely dependent on one's memories. And the idea that people with less ability to remember are somehow less themselves is rather disturbing (and possibly ableist). And if that underlying idea *were* true, would recovering lost memories be equivalent to recovering one's self? Would banking memories into a vessel (like the pensieve in HP) be removing parts of your self, rather than simply some data your self had acquired?
d. There are decidedly positive applications of amnestics, most notably when they are used specifically to benefit the recipient by removing or blocking a specifically horrible and/or lethal threat, an effect that would prevent that person from continuing any sort of normal or comfortable life. Or effects where one person knowing would lead to widespread damage to other innocent people (certain antimemetics and cognitohazards and such). Although the considerations you brought up *have* caused me to think this through a little more.
I've got a story in the works (original fiction, possibly gonna wind up as a fanfic) wherein a guy has the ability to move memories from others' minds into his own, erasing them from the original owner, and he winds up using it to help those victims of trauma who are unable to move forward with the memories plaguing them (so he winds up amassing a giant collection of his own, flashbacks to trauma he never actually encountered firsthand). I think I'll have to include some discussion of how much this does or does not potentially impact the victim's actual personality or personhood -- someone should at least raise the question.
e. There are decidedly *unethical* uses of the amnestics, albeit in the case of the D-class personnel I think it's just one more insult thrown on after the injuries. But erasing the guy's ability to remember how horrible things can be and then just throwing him back into the fire, that... fits the Foundation's bottom line, and is incredibly cruel. In effect, it's like the way they treat the girl with Montauk, but spread out across all of their victims instead of just one, and they outright ignore the humanity of the people they're harming. Which... is also a fine piece of satire pointing the finger back at real life and asking how much we IRL ignore the humanity of the people we're harming, not for reasons like "ostensibly saving the world" and not even for "stopping the terrorists" (for which we already do some inexcusable things), but even so low as "buying disposable clothing that looks neat but is dirt cheap" (and let us ignore any reasons as to how this might be, until John Oliver comes along to discuss disposable fashion and supply-chain issues).
(Also reminds me of my concern over using memory-altering drugs during colonoscopies, since (a) a person wouldn't be able to remember whether the procedure was torturous, and thus would not be making an informed choice when deciding whether or not to go through it a second time, and (b) any time memory-altering drugs get used during medical procedures, I worry about how much this gets the doctors to ignore the patient's comfort or consent since the patient won't remember it anyway.)
f. There are people in this comments section claiming that personality death happens if you erase a couple *days* of memories, and... what? You're telling me that if I get into a car wreck and wake up a few days later with no memory of the accident itself (a very common occurrence), I've somehow lost my personality? Pull the other one. A person could lose months' worth of memories before it starts to become an issue of personality alteration. I might be very much not the same person as I was twenty years ago, but I'm close to the same person I was last year. And I *already* have issues remembering things I did last month or last week (and sometimes last hour -- thank you, ADHD brain).
g. I expect to be thinking of this video as I work with the upcoming parts of my SCP-fusion fic (in the *Person of Interest* fandom -- it's got a shifting title but the key phrase "Unseen Things" remains), because the core concept is an antimemetic effect slowly erasing members of the team. They're still part of the story (they're the "unseen things" of the title), but the text no longer refers to them and the characters no longer remember that their friends even existed. (I borrowed the general concept from that scip that deletes whole concepts, like dogs or blinker lights. The erased characters are erased so thoroughly that anyone who ever knew them can't interact with even the concept of their personhood.)
Now, given how thoroughly the interaction among these characters shaped the past five years of their world in canon, how strongly does erasing those people alter the character's very sense of self? I'd already planned to have one of them truly feel like he's hollow, like he's missing some core part of his identity that he can't put a finger on. Not sure how much I'll shift my ideas based on your essay.
h. There are a few villains I'm familiar with who use memory alteration with no attempted justification of it being for the greater good, and I've long been fascinated by the tactic, and how it can turn heroes into de facto villains without them even being aware. The false queen in The Silver Chair, getting the captive prince to adore her and only remember that he's a captive for one hour each night. Coyote in Gunnerkrigg Court, stealing Ysengrin's memory of having attacked his friend (among many other memories, used to manipulate him right into Coyote's plan). Willow in Buffy the Vampire Slayer erasing her girlfriend's memory of a fight -- a villainous move, and one that gets called out, from an otherwise positive character.
I would say that the core underlying issue is Informed Consent. It's suppressing or erasing information that the victim would have considered while making decisions for their future. Willow's girlfriend can no longer make informed decisions about how to relate to Willow, because Willow stole the memory of a fight they'd had that would have colored that relationship. Ysengrin can no longer make informed decisions about how to relate to Antimony or to Coyote, because he lacks the information of how bad Coyote has gotten or how dangerous Ysengrin himself has gotten. The prince cannot make information decisions about how to relate to the false queen and the true heroes, because his awareness of reality has been suppressed. Whether the reasons are outright evil, chaotic, or entirely self-centered, they prevent a person from making authentic choices in full awareness of the factors by which the choice should be made.
i. Then again, I'm also aware of memory loss used to be kind and evade severe consequences. In Battle Angel Alita, the mad scientist Desty Nova once uses memory suppression on Alita to try to neutralize her inside a kind of dream world (which ends up affecting him more than it affects her), but in the same work there's Ido, Alita's father-figure, who runs up against a truth that was driving him insane, until he had to erase so much of his memory that he forgot even Alita herself -- yet he was still, fundamentally, Ido, in a way that Alita was not herself while her memories were suppressed.
So... it's complicated. And I'm quite glad that you made me think this much about it; thank you.
I have thought about it for a long time. I think erasing memories is equal to murder. It does not matter if it is erasing the past 30 seconds. It still is murder. I see the difference between the two in a similar fashion to the method someone dies. For instance, a heart attack vs being dropped in a volcano. One option leaves behind a body for the family to bury while the other does not. In this case, wiping memories is leaving behind a LIVING body for you to do stuff with. I do think it makes sense for the SCP foundation to erase memories over murder, since murdering people would only lead to more people asking questions.
So getting blackout drunk is suicide? Do you die if you walk into a room and forget why? We forget all the time, do we die every time? If not how is that different?
@@rabblerabble814 To a degree, yes, it can be seen that way. How I see it though is there is a difference between losing a memory fully and forgetting it. Often memories can be remembered if your brain is stimulated properly to lead you to remember them. The memories being erased implies that you cannot regain them from said stimulation. Before realizing this distinction, I DID see us naturally losing memories and changing as people as us essentially dying from natural causes. I will note though, naturally losing memories (aka dying from natural causes) STILL is very different from having memories erased (aka being murdered). As for getting drunk, I have never gotten blackout drunk, so I do not have a first-person perspective reference point on if it is possible to regain memories. What I do know of is only stories from people getting drunk. It seems that often they can regain the memories from enough stimulation, it is just harder.
I think, in certain circumstances amnestic can be life-saving, especially with infohazards, or mimetic effects
While this is an interesting subject to discuss, partly because there's no clear answer, I don't think that removing parts of someone's memories can be equated with straight up killing them.
In the real world a person can suffer brain damage and lose a good chunk of their memory or even personality but we don't treat them as if they died, even if the person one used to know is partially gone for good. It'd be like saying that because you lost a part of your body the rest of you is no longer alive, that's not how dying works.
That said, messing with someone's memories is definitely cruel since it can mess with their sense of self, but I'd say it's usually preferable to just ending them.
In the case of d-class personnel it's also a matter of logistics, there's no reason to not keep using them for as long as it is viable, expendable people are a limited resource despite of how ironic that is. And there's also the matter that there's no need to delete all of the knowledge they have about the foundation, the training and learned skills can be kept since they're useful.
This is too good a take not to be expanded into a full article or tale on the site.
Nano is a prefix that can apply to whatever, so a nanoinch is a perfectly reasonable unit :)
I would like to point out that Dr. Cimmerian is here today to talk to us about ethics
Thanks for this.
Horrifying.
Is there an argument to be made about their life still having meaning to others? Their accomplishments and sacrifices still influence and help/hinder other people. If someone with dementia forgets everything about themselves it doesn't change the significance of their life imo. So I would say that Amnestics is still a lesser evil than murder.
I've never liked the monthly termination idea, but if D class are ever released back into the population, certainly they would be amnesticized to remove critical info. Targeted amnesics could have therapeutic applications which I think lots of staff would volunteer for. So while they could be abused, I think amnestics also have very ethical application which would be preferable to their absence.
I think it depends on the cover story. If you amnesticize a retiree from the MTF back to his enlistment and replace everything he saw with some mundane (non-anomolous) atrocities analogous to what he saw on the MTF, then you haven't really helped him- you just covered up the foundation's existence. How you use them matters.
Think about it this way. I had a severely impacted wisdom tooth, it was practically upside down in my mouth and imbedded in the nerve of my jaw. As I was going in to surgery to have it removed, the surgeon said that there was a good chance that removing this tooth had a good chance of causing permanent nerve damage and leaving me with a numb jaw for the rest of my life. My response was, "so I have the choice of losing the feeling in my jaw, or keeping the feeling as this tooth causes it to rot out. I'll take my chances with the numbness." Given the choice between doctors telling me I just got out of a coma that gave me some personality altering nightmares vs having to live with some of the things I might have seen or maybe even had to do within the foundation, I think I'd come to the same conclusion.
That's actually an interesting connundrum. There might be some nuance to be found in how the amnestics actually work; if they actually destroy a person's memories as opposed to burying them. Either one would have it's own set of complications.
On a bit of a tangent, there was a setting I was working on which had various groups of feuding immortals. If one of these beings died, it would be reborn in a new body (as a child of some random parents), so true victory was rare. Death would take someone out of the fight a decadee and some change, but ultimately was an inconvenience to them. Except that one of the factions discovered a workaround, essentially delivering a traumatic blow to the soul where it retained information. The result was that when the immortal was reborn it did not retain any of its previous characteristics or traits- effectively killing the person it used to be. Your talk here made me think back to that, because of the similar concept.
Others with memory disorders can probably point out that an existence where you regularly lose memories is substantially better than death. Your ideas of memory are just very flawed in general. Even neurotypical people forget things all the time, a large number of childhood memories get overridden as you are remembering a memory, and the brain just begins to make stuff up. With your metaphor, those were building blocks of what you were, it was what lead to more major stuff, but the house of self stays standing long after you forget your 8th birthday party or whatever friendships you lost then.
Hell, you can even go back to times as a baby, even if they dont cause memories, the habits remain, abused babies get fucked up habits that hurt them later in life, even in absence of memories.
It could be a fun tale, some amnestitized guy, used to be in some anomalous cult but cant remember it. finds it very easy to research things again, as skills come independently from memories, winds up in captured again, and learns he was a repeat offender
I think it's important to consider people in real life who in fact HAVE amnesia, and studying their life experience would be really helpful (especially retrograde)
It's basically chemically Induced and targeted retrograde amnesia
I wouldn't call memory wiping murder, but its kinda the closest thing to murder that isn't just murder, if that makes any sense. It would be interesting to see the various uses of it thought, I know a few articles mention the illicit use of amnesties in SA cases, and a few Foundation sites would prob act as cartels for various amnestic/stimulant/depressant/hallucinogen mixtures. Also would be interesting to see how the Foundation uses amnesties for covert operations, as it would essentially allow you to keep a political prisoner unaware of their confinement and open up new ways of torture to be used that are way more effective than just pain.
using amnesties on your scientific staff....bruh that's one way to have gaps in SCP files lamo
Considering that we don`t have an annalogue for amnestics like the ones in SCP, everiting is pure speculation. I personally don`t see how someones personality won`t revert back as they were before the errased period, after all what is your personality but behavior lurned from our expiriances. What could be persistent might be addictions and certiantly wounds, as they affect the hole body. Over all, if every month the old D class is replaced with new recriuts, as the murder side of the meaning of "termination" implays, then it is a lot more humane.
Amnestics are used as a tool to not be a force for killing innocent people who happen to have been exposed to the anomalous. Usually the amnestic treatment occured in the place of replacing her
I think a big problem is consent. If people wanted to forget the supernatural, that would be one thing. It might be so traumatic that people beg for amnestics. But the trope here is that people are forcibly given amnestics against their will, having their memory erased even if positive change happened.
Imagine a very permissive person comes home to find their partner cheating on them. They realize this is the last straw and they become more assertive, deciding to leave their partner, find their own place, get the job they always wanted, etc. But then the boyfriend just erases their memory. We would all say that is fucked up. Same goes for the SCP Foundation erasing unwilling people's memory.
Is it really that much of a stretch to assume the foundation would have access to some sort of anomalous or even technological way to erase memory from a day to a few hours? I could read and see that they have essentially a neutralizer from Men In Black and I wouldn’t bat an eye, though that may just be me
Yeah, you are on the money here. While one can think of killing as the worse answer, living with the potential pain down the road caused by large-scale amnestic use could still be horrible. I think it would be demonstrably cruel for the foundation to amnesticize a doctor who had a strong relationship with an scp and for the scp to realize that the person they knew is gone.
I think it comes down to the time since the event happened. 3-4 hrs and you're risking limited damage. 5-10 hrs you're likely going to have to modify the memory, not just erase it or you're going to cause problems. 1-2 days you absolutely hvae to modify the memory because the gaps will cause long term damage. Longer than 3 days and you're going to start wandering into death of personality symptoms. The trick is to catch is soon and get the statements fast before you remove the memory. But after a certain time point you start having to go in and modify the memories because if you just remove them you start creating gaps that once they hit a certain threshold it causes major problems. Now that's why I'd suggest a weeping angel protical for memetic hazareds. You get a chemical injection before you go into the lab, you're recorded the entire time you're in the lab and if possible the memories get downloaded before you leave and have your brain wiped to that chemical tracer. That way you're only losing short term thoughts/memories, and low risk to brain damage and the mind reacts as if you just spaced off and disassociated for x hrs. And you can have the data to look over when you go back in so you don't start from square 1 every time. And progress can be made.
ahoy hoy-
what about normal citizens/people outside of scp foundation having a run in's with a scary scp?
for example i wound want to forget if i a had run in with "The Fifth Church" or any scp related to "The Fifth Church"!
but say that if i a run in the church of the broken God/ The "Church of Maxwellism" i want to remember them! and maybe join them?
I think the idea of using amnestics to recycle D-Class is fine, what with most of them being terrible people in death row or sentenced to life in most canons. But thats an ethical argument and hey, not like they’re gonna complain to the Ethics Commi…
Hey, what were we talking about again?
Clearly you are in better hands if you are dealing with the Men in Black. At least they construct a positive filler memory for you.
I imagine some of the answers would be found looking into the lives of people with traumatic brain injuries. I don't think you lose your core if early memories go or you can't form new ones. You are not the You that you were, but remain a valuable life and therefore better off than dead.
Maybe do a video on the logic of the monthly termination? Are they worried people will get contaminated or escape? Letting the survivors become specialists would make more sense.
Spouler:Before the amnestics the SCP foundation actually killed the witnesses (they killed a boy and a police oficer according to the story) ... So, great job with the amnestics😅
221 like
I disagree. If you wipe the memories, the memories are gone, not the person. If you kill the person when you kill the memories, then the feelings connected to the forgotten memory wouldn't remain as it's a whole new person; I'm not going to feel the same way about a house down the road from me getting robbed as the person who lives in that house, for example.
Mark itZero wrote: When you build your RUclips personality with a video series titled "You're wrong about" people are gonna be waiting for your mistakes to throw in your face
July 8th 2021, comment on the video titled: It's ok to be wrong sometimes
Without going into detail, I don't know that I'm happy with the return of this style of video titles "You're wrong about X"
I liked that you were improving, adjusting and correcting yourself: when you started giving attributions to posters of memes you featured with the dmfs19 videos, starting with your video about dmfs19 septembre 21st 2021, that was great I liked it, because It'd been months I kept leaving comments under your videos like "overseer_16/fanboyx27/shoulder gang" or "give shoulder a shout out", but even when you finally did give attribution, I felt it was late and as if you only started doing that as a result of the talk of attribution that gained momentum in the community amidst the explosion in popularity of scp 2316's bodies in the water phrase becoming a tiktok meme after august 11 2021. Like that wasn't instinctual or spontaneous for you to do that before then.
And then you realized you shouldn't continue too much with the video titles "you're wrong about X" because of the less than tactful tone.
Yes it was fun that Nizaoko asked you to say "bing bong your opinion is wrong" but I'm hoping you're not going back to that too much because I really believe you've committed to the decision to not sound like "a jerk" like you used to say.
Yes I'm stretching, but since you're an scp content creator and given the heavy baggage of ego-driven drama the scp community has known: You do not want to give ammo to people who are all too eager to dislike you further
In the comments, people were receptive to the show of humility you made in the videi "it's ok to be wrong sometimes" please continue. Because being mistaken is fine it happens to everyone, "being wrong" kinda has that connotation of feeling shame like Gaussian entity said. And calling out someone for being wrong is yes a step toward giving that person a chance to self reflect but also it's positioning yourself as potentially smug or superior/better ...
Just my opinion.
The rest of your comments I take no issue with (I don't think we agree on the "wrong" thing but that's a long and unnecessary conversation). However, the meme credit thing has bugged me consistently since I first read this comment. I have no idea what the 2316 bodies in the water "thing" was about but I started saying the name of the meme creators in the videos themselves instead of leaving them in the description (which I *always* included) because I personally felt it was a better way to do it.
As far as I know there was absolutely 0 outside pressure to do so. I don't mean that in a sense of "I deserve credit for doing the bare minimum" and would never bring it up in a serious way unless I'm getting called out for only doing the right thing due to outside pressure.
Giving credit in the description is *the bare minimum* and I didn't like the idea of doing the bare minimum when these people put serious work into their memes. And when I'm benefiting from that work.
But no one told me to do it. Or seriously complained at me about it. Or made me do it. I did it. For me.
Dr Cimmerian Chronicles Continues In Drama Twitter Hated With Vtuber At Bayonetta 3 Drama At SMG4 Drama More Drama Video Idea Please
first, also I found this to be a great video. I always thought that oh yea just get rid of the memory and move on cause that's more ethical then killing. but this video actually help me relies what that actually means. Still do option A but that makes things a lot more grey.
Though the issue is nuanced and I don’t entirely agree with this take, I will say that I personally have experienced being given drugs against my will which resulted in memory loss, and I *literally* independently came to the conclusion that they had killed who I would have been. So yeah.
You don't need to expand on this if you don't care to, but I am quite curious about the circumstances surrounding this breach of consent.
And do you feel that the potential you that had been killed would have been a positive you, or a negative you? (Given your overall phrasing, I *assume* a positive you was lost, but can conceive of a scenario in which you-at-the-time resisted the treatment but then later were able to appreciate the benefits of a treatment you couldn't reasonably consent to at the time.)