Simple - conclusive studies have not been undertaken. That's what makes "if" so important.
Conclusive studies proving that there is harm in viewing virtual child porn?
Indeed, there is no such thing, because there is not a speck of evidence that viewing an image can generate harm at all in the first place.
Think about this: If there could be an inherent harm in viewing images, we should expect to be living in a very different world. A world where violent movies could not exist, because it would be generating hordes of killers and traumatized people all over. A world where advertisement would work with everyone all the time, because it would not be a matter of individual reactions to media, but a matter of images with power over everyone regardless of their psyche.
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
SW, are you sure there is no man-eating invisible dragon in my closet?
Is that then a reasonable posture to take precautions against it?
No - you're absolutely right - I'm not sure. Is it reasonable, though, to suppose that there might be a man-eating invisible dragon in your closet?
That's exactly what I'm asking you. Because it sounds as if you were claiming that it is reasonable to take precautions against an idea of harm which existence you have no evidence of. So, what's your answer?
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
Of course you are never "sure" of anything in an irrefutable 100%. I've granted you that perhaps in the future, new studies will prove that there actually is a harm in viewing images of virtual child porn. But until there is no compelling evidence, until we have nothing but evidence that the only thing we have is millions of different reactions depending on the individual personalities of each individual; there is no reason to take any precautions against virtual child porn.
Do you not find this line of thinking reasonable? And if you don't, please explain why.
You really haven't been keeping up or paying attention, have you. I've answered this particular question numerous times. Please read back and try to keep up in future.
No, SW, come on, don't give me that come back will you?. This is what people refer to when talking about how you behave in debates. You know this is a very big thread and that we all have lives outside of the thread (At least I do). I can't keep up with
every single post. Stop being rude and giving me the
"you haven't been paying attention have you!" line, and then ask me to go hunt through the hundreds of pages to see if I can find where you addressed this. Please take the time and answer the question. Do you find that line of thinking reasonable?Yes or no? If not, please explain why.
If the explanation was too long, then to the very least, link me to it. But don't just get nasty with me and ask me to look throughout this thread.
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
Do you understand that your personal disgust with something isn't in itself reason enough to claim that such thing is harmful?. Honestly, do you?
Absolutely not, and I've never stated or deliberately suggested that I do. Do you really believe I have? If so, please show me where.
Ok, I was just asking because I got that impression given the passion with which you defend a position regardless of the lack of evidence.
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
Sounds like you have seen something different then.
Different from what, exactly?
Different from the actual reality which is: We live in a world in which images affect different people in hundreds of different ways. A world that behaves very much the way we should expect if images in themselves did not have an inherent power of changing conduct inside of them, but instead it all depends on the individual psyche of each person.
Originally Posted by Ron_Tomkins View Post
I think it should apply to everything. Do you not? And if not, why?
You might think that, but I can assure you that you sure don't live by it, otherwise you would have already have died by it, probably through starvation!
Can you expand on this? Seriously, I just want to know what exactly did you have in mind.
