Anouther one; not that sure, but >50% and I think it’s in the spirit of the thread:
Non-negligible (on average >25%, <75%) fraction of badness of rape is a consequence of the fact that the society considers rape especially bad.
secondaccount314
Karma: 28
Okay, I probably should elaborate.
About polyamory:
I use the definition of polyamory like Aella’s:
The definition of ‘polyamorous’ that I find cleanest, for me, is not forbidding your partner from having extra-relationship intimacy.
(I didn’t borrow the very concept from her, only neat definition)
If you fit this definition, but you just don’t want intimacy with anyone besides your partner—I consider you poly. I think this polyamory should be the default option.
(Now that I’ve thought about it, a more succinct not-exactly-definition might be “fuck jealousy!”. All the rest is conclusions.)
About psychedelics:
My bad, I wasn’t detailed enough. New weaker statement: “Responsible (where “responsible” is easy enough that >80% of population would have no problems implementing it if already existing safety practises became non-taboo common knowledge) usage of psychedelics and some other drugs (primarily, MDMA) has pretty big positive expected long-term utility”
Polyamory is not just ethically-neutral, like homosexuality, but strictly ethically superior than monogamy.
Usage of psychedelics and some other drugs (primarily, MDMA) has pretty big positive expected long-term utility.
Doesn’t that prove too much? You can apply the same logic to, for example, using transport (each time you try to ride a train and it doesn’t hurt you, your trust in “use transport is safe” increases, so you try to ride a motorcicle). Or to sport (each time you play ping-pong and it doesn’t hurt you, your trust in “sport is safe” increases, so you try BASE jumping).
Just… when you decide what to try you should not use a mental category that includes both LSD and heroin. I don’t think it’s that hard.