Dear Sir, I have been deeply interested in ethics, discovered video game’s. GTA and CoD being most famous of these things and I discovered your article and read it. Also I have read opinions of others. I concluded that people easily can make simplified yet incorrect of judgments. Am I wrong? Also, is it slavery consent or not? Same with Stockholm syndrome. From me, I think its a case of what has some similarities but not specifically. However, people generalize on the surface. Y/N? Thank You Sir

Okay, I admit I’m not… totally sure exactly what you’re asking, but let’s see… You asked ‘yes or no?’ so…

Can people easily make simplified yet incorrect judgements?
Well, yes.  All the time, unfortunately, especially about subjects that aren’t matters of measurable, objective fact, like ethics.  That probably includes me, much as I might try to avoid it.

Is it still slavery if there is consent?
…hmm.  You know, I’m not sure.  If you look at a dictionary definition of slavery, I don’t think it matters – slavery is simply the state of being owned by someone, regardless of how you came to be in that state, and I suppose in theory you could become a slave willingly, if you lived in a society that permitted it, by selling yourself.  I don’t think that’s common, though, and I suspect that in practice we’d be more likely to consider that indentured servitude rather than slavery.  I think slavery is generally understood to imply lack of consent.

EDIT: I suppose there’s debt-bondage, where a person who cannot pay a large enough debt is automatically enslaved to the creditor, but I don’t know if I’d call that consent, as such, even in a society where debt-bondage is accepted as the natural consequence of defaulting on a loan.

Stockholm syndrome?
Well, Stockholm syndrome refers to developing sympathetic feelings for one’s captor, and you can’t really call someone your captor if you’re consenting, can you?  I’d say that one is a contradiction in terms.