Notes on the concept of consent
January 31st 2007 03:56
The possibility of cryonics makes "death" problematic.
"Purpose" and "meaning" might have no applicability when speaking of life as a whole.
And some people conduct flame wars over whether tomatoes are fruits or vegetables.
Ordinarily sufficient words fly apart in special cases, or when you try to extend them to contexts where they don't belong. And this shouldn't be surprising. What's demonstrated could be described as the vagueness of categories. Or, if you want a use-theory analogy, it's the context-specificity of tools -- the impracticability of hammers for splitting electrons, or cyclotrons for constructing houses.
***
Grey areas in "consent", even when used as legal term of art, shouldn't surprise.
Such ambiguities (what conditions count, how far they extend, etc) become more complex when you introduce obligations on other people (for instance, to provide or disclose certain information, or to prove certain facts), and when you're asking not just about what consent is, but how to recognize or ensure it.
***
Consent, the everyday notion, might involve:
- Absence of coercion by others. In Spinoza's terminology, the motivation should "actively" come from you rather than "passively" from your environment. But what types and levels of coercion count, or does any influence render you non-competent? What's the line, if any, between a friend's suggestion and a salesman's fast-talking? Does advertising coerce? Does inequality in power relations make consent impossible? And how about inequality in ability -- for instance, in intelligence?
- Absence of coercion by the self. Say you have a self-effacing or timid personality, and can't ask for what you want. But to what extent do internal inhibitors count? Does "fear of success" count?
- Positive, enabling conditions -- possession of your "right mind" on some standard -- perhaps the standard of normal functioning, or peak functioning, or ideal functioning. You're not completely drunk or drugged out or too tired to think. But also, you have: awareness of choice; rationality (a lunatic can't consent); a degree of mental ability (infants can't consent); knowledge of what you're agreeing to; knowledge of risks and likely and possible consequences; knowledge of alternatives; and knowledge of what you want.
- A proper context -- a situation where the yes/no choice makes sense, and one that involves (or, as in the case of sex, could involve) thought or even deliberation, as opposed to automatic response.
***
Consent is to some extent the attempt to write free will into law.
But, as a non-legal word, as an everyday concept, it's arguably distinguishable from free will -- just as liberty is.
You can consent even when destined.
***
The law holds you to have consented or not -- in some cases quite artificially. It's imposed, it simplifies for practicality's sake, for ease of enforcement and governance, and it's distinguishable from an everyday notion.
But even everyday consent holds you -- that is, even the everyday notion is artificial, is imposed -- there is no standard written into nature. The norms and criteria of rationality, knowledge, freedom from coercion, etc are arbitrary, community-dependent, and vary between and within societies, and change and evolve.
As do the types and strengths of moral intuitions, and as does human nature.
Definitions are never settled, and have openness, flexibility, adaptability, built in.
***
It's within language that you employ a reality/appearance dichotomy.
And similarly in the case of agreement and acts of agreement. Nodding and refusing, declaring "I consent", the words "yes" and "no", and the consequences you bind yourself to -- these also had origins -- and are dispensable.
***
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article Chess. The image of the Star Trek matter transporter came from this site. The image of the signed contract came from this site.
| 104 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by katyzzz
Photography Tips
Health Focus
Poetry Lighthouse
MS Paint Art
I love Chess, don't believe whatever you hear about the success of Cryonics- it ain't gunna happen, dude....how is that for youngspeak?
I do hope you are not going to quote me again, rather takes the thrill out of things, makes you a bit of a Sherlock Holmes. It's elementary my dear Watson.
My philosopher friend or merely my philosophical friend, I'd say the first is you, the second is me.
Lord, what will you quote out of this one. I should have stopped at line 1, just love getting those fingers burnt.
katyzzz
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Any Hoo
If we try to make sense of the laws definition of anything we will all go insane. Precedent traps it to pathway it has chosen years ago even when the original path is gone.
I get the feeling that Consent and Freewill are dependant upon each other.
How much is enough free will and how much is enough consent?
"The Law is an Ass" Thomas Moore.
Comment by JohnDoe
Film & TV on DVD
"No man is good enough to govern another man with out that others Consent" - Abraham Lincoln
Now Rook to pawn 3...your move
Comment by Cibbuano
20/20 Filmsight
Science News
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
What implication does this have for life? Will an exact clone be created? Or a physical copy that has no life?
Comment by Always Eighteen
Always Eighteen
I wonder how much of our decisions are actually made by our own selves, rather than the influences of the environment., our culture, peer groups, how we were raised, etc.
Comment by Adrian
Philosophy Blog
Dear Damo,
Well, was temporarily under his influence, just because I'd been reading him. At the moment I'm on a Humean high.
What's your Cure knowledge like?
However much i push it down
It's never enough
However much i push it around
It's never enough
However much i make it out
It's never enough
Never enough
However much i do...
Freedom will always be an unfinished project.
Dear JD,
Well, depends what's meant by govern. There's a difference between compliance and obedience. Plenty of dictators are good enough to extract compliance. And maybe plenty of advertisers are good enough to extract obedience.
Bishop takes pawn. Your move.
Dear Cibby,
The way Star Trek sees them, there's some sort of deal about saving the pattern, then re-creating it.
I don't know why they don't just go around creating armies-on-demand when they need to fight the Borg...
There's this pretty little play by Caryl Churchill called "A Number". A father has made numerous versions of his son. Some are screwed up, some are psychopathic, some are utterly, Scientologically, prozacly, level.
Environment matters more than DNA.
Dear Always,
In my opinion: none of it. There's nature and there's nurture, and there's the dream of free will, and the reality of destiny.