#moral and ethical framework

[apage4things]

Something something puritanical belief systems

Something something Calvinism

*Gestures around*

Meeting genuine adults that think legal = good, illegal = bad is so bizarre, like bro not even the law itself agrees that that is a good ethical framework

[qiu-yan]

i'll write a more in-depth post later, but imo one of the reasons for the level of disagreement in this fandom is that many of us readers can see what mxtx is trying to imply about ethics through her work and simply do not agree with her base premise. like i think that there are some conclusions about the various characters in mdzs that mxtx wants you as the reader to draw. you can kind of tell even if you don't agree with those conclusions. more importantly, though, you can also tell exactly what kind of moral philosophy mxtx (consciously or unconsciously) favors, and what she treats as the granularity of morality, so to speak. the most commonly-held positions in the fandom are those mxtx intends for the reader to reach using her own beliefs about ethics as fundamental axioms.

the problem, then, is when the reader does not agree with mxtx's unspoken axioms of morality. if you come into mdzs with a moral framework different enough from what mxtx has (consciously or unconsciously) used to write mdzs, then of course you're going to come to different conclusions regarding the characters or even the object lessons of the story.

or rather, in simpler terms: the rammies, mxtx....the rammies....

[antigonewinchester]

stumbled on a thread about LOTR the other day of someone asking why couldn't Boromir have taken the Ring and its power & saved his people--and the thread writer argued (if I'm remembering right) that the Ring isn't metaphorical of power in general but power that makes you violate your principles, and that kind of power, in LOTR's moral framework, always leads to evil.

which was on my mind thinking of demonic power w/in SPN (at least in Kripke's era), its associations w/ revenge and its relationship to evil. in S1, it's clear to see why Sam makes the right narrative choice in 1x22 in not killing John -- he would've been getting revenge on the demon who killed his mother & tore apart his family by... killing his father and once again tearing apart the family he has left. getting revenge for your family by killing your family doesn't square.

then of course there's S4 and demon blood and that imo the Ring is a good metaphorical way of understanding why and how the narrative frames it. I know some ppl argue against the show's framing, why is demon blood "evil," isn't Sam using it to save people, save the world, etc. I'm not gonna convince anybody at this point, but look at it like the Ring: you can't use the Ring to save the world, even with the best of intentions. it's a power that will eventually warp you to break your principles & values, and that's what makes it evil.

[sbnkalny]

Rigatoni comes with water and that's packed into things.

I also experienced the sweet bliss that comes with merely a trick of the light?

[alternis]

Figment!Tim is an unreliable narrator regarding Aestel's motivations bc Aestel can only communicate in words by taking over Tim's higher brain functions so they can never have a real conversation, which is very fun, but from my fully objective viewpoint:

Aestel is being genuine when they say to want to help, in that they are an entity that likes humans and dislikes that the experiments forced them to harm humans, but. also. they genuinely don't understand why Tim gets mad at them for doing things like "interfering with his thought patterns" or "directly hijacking his higher brain functions when he's semi-comatose". Aestel has been letting Tim make all the decisions about how to use Aestel's powers this whole time, with Aestel only nudging Tim's thoughts towards using the Aestel because he had misconceptions about the Aestel and Aestel couldn't explain that it isn't evil because Aestel couldn't do language yet. Aestel just wants to help. it's very selfish of Tim to not be willing to share the things he has, like a body that can move around or a brain that can conceptualise language. Aestel knows Tim knows what sharing is, as Aestel has access to all of Tim's childhood memories and knows multiple teachers explained the concept to him.

Of course Tim is the only being that can let Aestel properly use their power (or the only one since Aestel gained self-awareness, as Aestel can't remember their own creation or what might have happened before they gained sentience), so Aestel is willing to be generous. Aestel's purpose is to use their power, like how humans are supposed to have their hearts beat and their lungs breathe, and now Aestel is helping Tim keep his heart beating and lungs breathing and Tim is helping Aestel keep using their power. This is obviously a win-win situation.

[billa-billa007]

Social Justice and Divine Justice | Exploring the Differences | Woke up

social justice and divine justice are distinct concepts with different focuses. Social justice deals with the pursuit of fairness and equality in human societies, addressing societal issues and inequalities. Divine justice, on the other hand, is a theological concept concerned with how a higher power administers justice, often in the context of religious beliefs and moral order. While they are separate ideas, they may intersect in discussions about morality and ethics in society, as some individuals and groups may view their pursuit of social justice as aligning with their understanding of divine principles or moral duty.

[askshivanulegacy]

It matters who the person was and what they did. The CEO demonstrated he had no worth. He trespassed on other people's lives.

Killing him off was simply the right answer.

woke up and immediately checked the news to make sure they hadn't caught him

[orcboxer]

Okay let me try this one again. The Trolley Problem sets up a scenario that sucks to be in. You either kill one guy, or you kill five guys. Nobody likes these options. We all don't want this be happening. That's kind of the point. It's a moral quandary. It's supposed to feel bad.

Now, according to a recent post floating around on tumblr, choosing either of the two options demonstrates "learned helplessness" and makes you a neolib sheep. The only correct answer, the post states, is to reject the question altogether. (Or to change the parameters of the question to include an option that saves everyone, thus eliminating the moral quandary.)

It sounds nice, doesn't it? Fuck this bad situation, we control our imaginations, so let's imagine a situation that doesn't suck. Hah! Bet you didn't think of that!

Here's the problem. Even though I think most situations generally have at least one solution that is both Feasible and Not Terrible, I have to admit that there are some situations (as in, not zero of them) where all the feasible options are unpleasant. This is a natural consequence of living in a world where A Lot Of Things Suck.

But if shitty situations do exist, even if it's super super rare, then it's not unreasonable to ask, "How should we make decisions when we find ourselves in a shitty situation?"

This is the beginning premise of the Trolley Problem. It says, "Hey what if you were in an unambiguously shitty situation? There are many shitty situations, so let's imagine one that is contrived enough to get everyone on the same page regardless of political affiliation, AND really emphasizes the key parts that I want to discuss."

Tumblr says "let me stop you right there. What if instead...we imagined a different scenario that wasn't as shitty?"

Well, okay, but then we're not talking about the same thing anymore. That doesn't actually count as an answer to the problem, you're just changing the subject to a completely different thing.

Tumblr goes on to say, "Exactly. That's the only thing you should ever do when confronted with an ethical quandary. Frankly the fact that you are willing to even consider a scenario that sucks suggests that you are fundamentally incapable of considering less shitty scenarios."

I just want to say I think that's bullshit. I don't think every problem is a trolley problem, but I do think that some problems are a trolley problem. And I think that those problems are worth discussing, even though they don't feel good. The trolley problem exists as a framework to discuss those problems.

Maybe our aversion to difficult decisions has an impact on our ethical reasoning, and maybe we should actually question how our ethical standards hold up under the weight of that aversion. So maybe moral quandaries like the trolley problem are worth discussing. And if you don't want to engage with the quandary, then don't - you don't have to concoct a whole essay about how the quandary is inherently morally bad.

It's possible that what you really want to say is that it sucks when people treat certain situations as trolley problems, when those specific situations actually do contain unambiguously feasible and unambiguously perfect solutions. I would agree with that.

But like. Let's not pretend that you can reduce all of ethics down to unchallenging black and white moralism.

[buttastic]

god I told myself I wouldn't do political discourse on tumblr anymore but I swear to god if I see one more "artists are only against generative ai because it threatens their petit bourgeois profit margins" take I'm going to lose it

there are artists who are petit bourgeois. these are your mid-level gallery artists who run studios staffed by assistants and apprentices, as well as like showrunners and creative directors and the like who are at least partially in charge of a system that employs workers. there are also outright wealthy artists who are what it says on the tin. mosts artists do not fall into either of those categories however and tend to either be hobbyists (whose class is not defined by their artistic output) or workers themselves

in calling anyone in the art world "petit bourgeois" we are acknowledging that the creation of art is labor, and that that labor can be exploited. anybody who knows anything about any creative field can see why this would be the case

copyright is kind a double-edged sword in a lot of ways, in the united states it mostly functions as a means for large corporations to hold onto power. this is true. while it can sometimes be used to help avoid the exploitation of smaller creators, that's not usually how it works.

THAT SAID, copyright is a tool used by large corporations to hold onto the labor they have extracted from artist-workers, who obviously and completely do not own the means of production. this is why people say pirating from major corporations is always morally correct, that labor was already stolen

but so like you see where we're getting at here? that we're reaching a consensus that art is labor and artists can be exploited as workers?

I'm not going to get into the individual ethics of piracy since it's a big topic with a lot of nuance, I'm just going to point out that nearly all of my comics are already available for free. so with all this in mind:

how the fuck are you gonna use the framework of marxism to say it's perfectly fine to reconstitute the labor of others to your own ends without compensating them???

like I've been banging this drum the whole time generative ai is first and foremost a fuckin labor issue. all your bullshit phone games and product designs dumb commercial jingles were created by real people putting food on their tables. to treat it as unworthy of consideration is to concede that the need for these commodities outstrips the rights of the people that make them. like. oh my god???

[zahri-melitor]

Thinking about Tim’s morality, what always gets to me is that Tim clearly developed it on his own, within his own rules of ethics, because we know how often Tim worked without Bruce or Dick from the very first stories.

Tim saw a problem with Bruce and sought out Dick to help.

Tim’s next story with Dick involves Tim showing up on Dick’s doorstep and claiming Bruce told him to learn how to be a Robin from Dick (which seems…dubious, given the rockiness of Dick and Bruce’s relationship at that stage).

After Tim received his costume and before his proper ‘first patrol’, Tim was on his own in Paris, having to make decisions on who to trust and listen to between Lynx, Clyde Rawlins, Lady Shiva, Edmund Dorrance and Henri Ducard.

Tim went out to track down Joker because he’d broken out and Bruce wasn’t available because he was overseas at the time. Against the advice of Alfred. While being a tiny Robin.

Tim chose to work with Helena and Steph and Lonnie and JPV and Selina, even when Bruce told him not to, even when he was hiding working with them from Bruce. And when they worked with him, Tim was very clear on what his ethical framework looked like and most of the time those he was working with compromised to follow Tim’s views on killing. But also - Tim was the one choosing to work with them, showing flexibility in comparison to how Bruce would have preferred him to act.

Tim was set by Bruce to teach Jean-Paul Valley how to be a vigilante in Gotham, when he was 14 years old and had only been a vigilante for a couple of months in universe. He didn’t have Bruce backing him up (because Bruce was firstly busy and then recovering overseas from serious injury). He didn’t really have Alfred (who was focused on Bruce). He didn’t have Dick (because Dick’s life was similarly in the end stages of falling apart in New York). He had himself and his wits and what assistance Harold could give him, trying to show JPV how they worked and then later trying to rein in JPV after being punched in the face and Azbats going off the rails.

His ethics can’t be following someone else’s cues (the ‘list on the fridge from Bruce’ joke) because Tim had to work it all out for himself with Bruce barely around and often not focused on him. He didn’t have a Batfam around him when he was starting out until he built one.

His ethics can’t be ‘two seconds from killing’ because if Tim needed to be restrained from killing, that would have become noticeable back when he was working with Lady Shiva and Henri Ducard. Before he even really was Robin.

If Tim was dogmatic and unable to compromise and hung up on the rules being the rules, he would never have teamed up with Steph and Shiva and Helena and Selina, all people he got into trouble for working with.

It’s just such a misreading of Tim’s fundamental character and how he built his own moral code and decided what was important to him largely independently of anyone else. Tim doesn’t kill, and one of the fundamental reasons he doesn’t is because he chose not to and he sees it as a line too far.

He worked that out on his own.

[talenlee]

3e: Alignment Is Invisible

The entire alignment system is sick from the top to the bottom and racist too.

Content Warning: I’m going to talk smack about not just Dungeons & Dragons‘ morality system in 3rd edition, but also, in the process, talk some smack about Christians, and more specifically the Jehovah’s Witnesses. If you’re not here for that, you should find yourself a door.

Few elements of Dungeons & Dragons that lay bare its deeply incoherent roots have endured quite so long as the alignment system. Whenever discussing the alignment system, and by extension, the conception of morality presented in this game, it’s always worth remembering that the framework was devised by, and speaks to the values of, a deeply racist and misogynistic man who in addition to those larger, more structurally common biases, was also a Jehovah’s Witness and heavily informed by the way that that specific sect of American Christianity works.

I’ll spare you a detailed rundown of what I mean by American Christianity (for now, because this is about Dungeons & Dragons), but instead in the broadest strokes indicate that the alignment system that Gygax conceived of was something cosmically tracked and enforced. It was a truly objective morality system; your intention or your attitude did not matter, because there was an absolute right and an absolute wrong to each action, and characters could choose to comply with that right or not, by degrees.

This is why I say racist: It’s a hard fact in the first editions of D&D under Gygax’s most direct control that killing orc children who hadn’t done anything was a moral good; those creatures were evil creatures, and regardless of consequences killing them was good. Gygax quoted the ‘lice make nits’ line from the colonialism of the Americas to reinforce this position, but he was also quite clear that it was the act itself that had its moral valence, not the results or the intention.

This quite frankly deeply evil and immoral ethical framework was the horse to which Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition had to nonetheless hitch its wagon, and the resultant discord show a host of cracks in the way it’s supposed to work. Politicians who starve millions are in no ways doing anything wrong because they’re doing their jobs and there’s nothing evil in signing a piece of paper, but the people who enforce that law and keep orphans away from the food are also not doing anything wrong because they’re just upholding order. The core rulebook of 3rd edition had to try and address this framework without making it too obvious that elements of it were being thrown out the window, especially as the purpose of alignment shifted subtly in the more programmatic, more, let’s say, intentionally designed world of 3rd edition.

See, in 3rd edition, the purpose of alignment was first and foremost to let you target things. Oh sure, it was flavour, it helped to inform some monster behaviours or styles, but mostly, you were never going to scan the alignment of things you fought (not worth the effort) which meant that what alignment did was let you make reasonable guesstimates for smart-targeting of spells and effects. If you threw a spell that protected you from evil creatures into the mix it meant that you had some control over the kinds of threats you’d deal with and then prioritise them. In the purest sense, this was a reference point for magical spells.

Secondarily to that, it informed the moral valence of what you were doing and it was with the rulebooks The Book of Vile Darkness and its prettier but equally vacuous cousin The Book of Exalted Deeds that 3rd edition attempted to really roll up its sleeves and discuss morality in a way that could square the circle of previous editions’ heinous moral landscape and 3rd edition’s attempt to improve it by just rearranging some of the words.

The problem, such as it was, is that alignment was fundamentally invisible. You could have no control over what you did and how it affected you morally, because it was a matter of checking a list of subjects and determining what you did not what you thought or tried to do. If you killed a child and it turns out that child was a shapeshifted demon in disguise, the rules would say that you were in no way morally impacted by your desire to do it. If on the othe hand, you refused to kill the child that was a demon in disguise, because that’s a pretty messed up thing to want to do, then you’d failed to do a good act.

Now, the way the Book of Exalted Deeds tried to grapple with this was by presenting virtues that stood apart from the listed examples of explicitly evil acts. Doing mercy was shown as part of the tension with punishing evil and that’s a pretty good rules patch for the absolutist nature of things. It at least lets the player present something that’s within their control (why they did something) rather than one of those invisible wires around them.

One of the examples the book presented in 3rd edition was that if you climbed a cliff face, and in the process a rock fell and started an avalanche, then that avalanche killed people, then you were morally liable. In fact, a Paladin who did that kind of thing would lose access to their powers, while trying to redeem themselves for the sin of… climbing something.

The added problem with all of this is that no element of opposition or ambition cannot be framed with different moral outlooks that change nothing about how it expresses. A ruthless pursuit of justice and a sadistic love of control over criminals would both be expressed roughly similarly in a Javert-style inspector. A characte’rs own alignment, what they determine their alignment to be is something that can always be rationalised in terms of a framework of moral choices, and those intentions are going to be what informs the actual result of the test. If you’re doing everything right for an asshole reason, the world does not see you as doing evil acts, but your alignment can still be evil because there’s nothing in the world forcing you to change from your mindset of being a total prick.

The 4th edition system did try and push back against this with some interesting ideas of its own, but based on watching people talking about 5th edition games? Boy howdy they did not learn from that and instead decided to RETVRN to the worst version of the system so far.

Check it out on PRESS.exe to see it with images and links!

[sbnkalny]

The only ethical economic system that is ever actually implemented is merely a sub-type of tautologism. the only moral meta-ethical framework is moral realism! study mechanism design.

[incorrect-wormquotes]

Skitter: You do realize we're on the same side, right?  Sundancer: Are we? If what I've been hearing about you is true, to advance your own team, you would throw mine under the bus without batting an eye.   Skitter: I would not!  Skitter (internally): Unless doing so was somehow optimal for the lives of a greater number of Brockton Bay residents than the six people that compose the Undersiders, which would be an action considered ethical and correct by most moral frameworks and certainly not a decision I would make "without batting an eye," and is in fact what anyone with an intact sense of rationality would choose to do under the same circumstances- 

[synthral]

From the moment we’re born, we’re brainwashed. Fairy tales, rom-coms, religious institutions, family expectations. They all whisper the same lie, that life culminates in marriage, in a white dress, in a house with a husband and three kids. That this is love. That this is fulfillment. That this is natural. That this is what YOU should want and it is what you need.

But if we are being serious, there’s no inherent reason for a man and a woman to be together. Heterosexuality isn’t some divine truth, it’s a construct, a tool of control, designed to uphold a patriarchal system that thrives on women’s subjugation. It’s the invisible leash that keeps people trapped, convincing them that their desires, their futures, their very selves must conform to a life of servitude, serving a man, birthing more people to serve more men.

Marriage at its core, is coercion. Not just socially, but historically and legally. It was never about love. It was about ownership, about ensuring women remained dependent, about securing lineage and property for men. Even today in its supposedly “evolved” form, it still reeks of that same expectation of monogamy as a duty, of reproduction as a requirement, of sacrificing personal identity for the “sanctity” of a bond that has always served men more than women.

And what about children? The world doesn’t need more of them. Antinatalism exposes the truth that procreation is not a moral duty but an ethical dilemma. We don’t owe the world more people, in fact, with the state of things, climate collapse, economic instability, rising fascism, we owe it to ourselves not to participate in the cycle of suffering. But of course the nuclear family needs its sacrifices. The system needs fresh bodies to keep capitalism alive. So we are pressured, manipulated, gaslit into thinking that having children is an inevitability rather than a choice, one we were never meant to question. If you cannot comprehend the concept of anti natalism you have to rethink your life, even my hardcore Muslim mother can understand it.

What about gay marriage? Same-sex marriage is a hard-fought and deeply meaningful right for many, it still exists within the larger framework of marriage as an institution of control. The fight for marriage equality wasn’t just about the right to marry, it should have also been about questioning why marriage is necessary for basic rights like stability, protection and legal recognition. Homosexuals have always found ways to build love, family and community outside of traditional structures and we deserve systems that honor those connections without forcing us to conform to an outdated institution. Love doesn’t need state validation to be real and the fact that marriage remains the ultimate legitimization of commitment shows just how deeply ingrained this illusion is.

None of this is inevitable. None of this is natural. It’s all a structure, a narrative forced upon us from birth. And if we can be programmed to believe in the heterosexual fairy tale, then we can unlearn it, reject it and build something better. Because we deserve more than the life we were told to settle for.

We must dismantle the patriarchy, tear down the institutions that keep us bound with patriarchy and males, we must build something that was never meant to serve men, but to serve us.

[astra-ravana]

Understanding The Left-Hand Path

The Left-Hand Path (LHP) in witchcraft and the broader occult tradition refers to a set of spiritual practices, philosophies, and paths that emphasize personal empowerment, self-deification, and the pursuit of individual freedom. The Left-Hand Path is often contrasted with the Right-Hand Path (RHP), which typically focuses on spiritual alignment with external moral or divine laws. Here are some key aspects of the Left-Hand Path in witchcraft:

• Self-empowerment: LHP practitioners typically focus on achieving personal power and mastery, often rejecting traditional religious or societal constraints. This includes embracing one's own desires, will, and inner strength.

• Individualism and Autonomy: The LHP emphasizes personal autonomy, with practitioners believing that they are their own authority and can shape their fate through willpower and self-determination.

• Rejection of Traditional Morality: LHP practitioners may reject conventional moral standards, particularly those imposed by mainstream religions like Christianity. They believe in creating their own ethical framework based on personal growth and enlightenment rather than obedience to external laws.

• Occult Knowledge and Rituals: The Left-Hand Path often involves the use of occult rituals, symbols, and magick to tap into unseen forces or realms. These practices might include working with deities or spirits that are considered "dark" or "unconventional" within mainstream religious contexts.

• Deification and Transcendence: A central aspect of the Left-Hand Path is the idea of self-deification—becoming one’s own god or embracing the divine within. This process often involves transcending the limitations of the material world and the ego.

• Exploration of Taboo or Forbidden Knowledge: LHP practitioners are often drawn to exploring areas considered taboo or forbidden by mainstream religions, such as the study of death, the afterlife, or working with spirits traditionally seen as "evil" or "chaotic."

• Darkness and Shadow Work: The LHP is sometimes associated with the "dark" side of spirituality, including shadow work, which involves confronting one's hidden, suppressed, or negative aspects to achieve greater self-awareness and healing.

While the Left-Hand Path is often misunderstood as "evil," it is more about personal transformation and embracing one's true self, free from societal or religious conditioning. Some well-known figures associated with the Left-Hand Path include Aleister Crowley, Michael W. Ford, and other occultists who focus on self-development and magickal practices.

It’s important to note that the Left-Hand Path can vary significantly in its specific practices and beliefs depending on the individual or tradition. Some practitioners might lean more toward spiritual enlightenment, while others focus on power dynamics and mastery over external forces.

[justblades]

hypothesis — anaxa x fem! reader

IN WHICH, your research study piques anaxa’s interest, inducing him to trap you into a collaboration to achieve the end you both desire

TAGS, MDNI. dub con, university setting, drugged sex, mind fuck, not proofread.

Applause rises from the crowd in front, the expressions painted on the majority’s faces are one of shared joy - it was a moment of delight and fulfillment, as marvelous minds clashed and melded with one another to craft such a significant research. Your group stands proud while the research panel awards you the trophy and certificate, hereby marking a significant milestone; the batch shall continue to tread the endless pursuit of wisdom and knowledge after the graduation.

The previous proud grins of some gradually curl upside down, catching your attention as you whip your head to your members’ direction. You pick up from the beads of tears streaming down their cheeks, the other attempting to bite down his threatening sobs, it was when it finally dawned on you: you truly have made it. The sleepless nights of stress and pressure indeed bore fruition.

After what felt like an eternity of suspense and excitement, the emcee then reads her closing spiel, formally announcing the end of the event. The big day comes to an end, loud cheers of the batch naturally follow, resounding all throughout the grove.

Unfortunately, fate had other plans, as it unties the already woven threads of triumph, letting it all loose as the scrutiny of the meticulous professor lands upon you. Seeds of doubt and confusion were sowed in the depths of your heart as you receive a bizarre call, “Professor Anaxa has queries about your research.”

Standing before you now is the infamous blasphemer of a teacher, whose mind is unbridled of moral restraints for the sake of knowledge. Expectedly, as a scholar, that trait of his was highly condemned and yet you find a part of you justifying his actions whenever you come across such wild rumors.

His fingertips slowly glide past the corners of the hardbound pages, skimming through the context of the rigorous part of your thesis: the methodology. Your heart thrums against your ribcage, this time, twice more as Anaxa slides in his pen to mark the part he was focusing on. Subsequently, he hums and looks at you with anticipation.

Slightest hint of disapproval emanates from his stare, to which the professor tries to coat as confusion to test your resolve. “If I’m not mistaken, you were the assigned leader of your thesis, no?” His voice stern as ever, you immediately respond. “Yes, sir.”

Dating back, you never happened to have a class taught by Anaxa. It was just a one time occurrence when you were able to witness how the cogs of his bright mind function when he stood as an adjudicator for a debate event held by the academy, to which he successfully cracks down the fallacies made by the opposing team with just mere questions, with the purpose of catching them by their own words, akin to a fish biting the bait and digging its own grave.

If anything, you knew him more through rumors and gossip, as the last you heard about was him expressing an opinion that scholars who are hellbent on gaining newfound knowledge shall be willing to bend the arrows of their moral compass to achieve such an end. Naturally, his school of thought anchoring on this expression was heavily criticized for the main reasons of ethics and confidentiality in the field of academics.

“Entitled ‘Efficacy of Specialized Alchemy through the Lens of Genetic Modification’ . . . Interesting. But the theoretical framework and methodology do not align.” He states, slate hue fixating on you. “If you were to study the efficacy of a particular object, you’d normally employ a design that encompasses both the quantitative and qualitative nature of the data to be derived, yet you stuck with one that adheres more to the latter. Care to explain how you came up with this process?”

Your brows furrow, bewilderment sits on your facial expression. The rationale of the methodology is already stated in the same paragraph for that question - why was he asking things that are obvious?

“Professor Anaxa—“

“Please refer to me as Anaxagoras.”

“Sir, as expressed in the introductory text, to determine efficacy, qualitative data shall provide an in-depth understanding of the subject, to name the factors that cannot be determined by merely recognizing patterns and trends. It tends to have a nuanced nature as it doesn’t just describe the leverages of the topic, its drawbacks shall also be determined in order to establish possible interventions for its improvement and to ensure your hypothesis is approved.”

“—Additionally, our thesis hinges on the concept of genetic modification with the main focus of improving our five senses, to be able to heighten them at our own volition as we see fit to be utilized according to the circumstance we are in.”

Anaxa pays close attention to your gestures as your hands tend to move on their own, a habit you happened to develop as you hone your dissertation all throughout these years. “However, our paper just touches upon the efficacy, not the practical application of specialized alchemy.”

“And? What are the results?”

Your jaw widens out of disbelief, as if the answers he was looking for cannot be found in the book. The longer this supposed questioning drags on, the more toll it took on you. Regardless, respect shall be shown, so you backtrack the results of your study. “The majority of the respondents strayed from describing the concept as something that can be done right, but rather, for them, it’s an insult to the human life. The quantitative data geared more to it being an impractical method to improve one’s capabilities, which was further supported by the verbatim cited in the presentation part of the chapter.” You recite, breaking off eye contact with Anaxa, head hung low facing the ground. Your fists balled, a bittersweet mood washes over you, recalling the summary of the data you gathered from the respondents.

“And let me guess, you were disappointed with the results.” With one sentence, you look back up at him, this time, more puzzled than before. A question arises, how did he know?

He slightly tilts his head and waves his hand in the air, “It is truly a shame to realize that these people, supposedly seeking wisdom, are the same ones who will never get to quench this thirst as they are held back by their morals. If we do not change up our methods, do you think it will yield different results each time?” His words had weight on them, not seemingly just blank questions one would typically ask in a thesis defense. The whole exchange becomes all the more confusing.

“I suppose you already have an idea where I’m getting at.” The teal haired drops his finality, and like a last puzzle piece falling into its right place by pure coincidence, you were able to see the bigger picture Anaxa prepared for you.

Alignment stems from shared vision, branching into different methodologies cultivated through revisions to obtain an answer from your assumptions. As Anaxa skimmed through your thesis, it was undoubted that he was able to relate your justification with his school of thought. The two of you were willing to tiptoe on the boundary lines of ethics in research - because if not, how will we be able to procure knowledge if sacrifices were not to be made?

“I understand, sir.” It was when you approved of his invitation that the green curls of smoke in the laboratory started to become more visible, carrying minuscule pigments of shimmer as rays of light spill in the littlest crooks of the room. “Wh—“

You were cut off as Anaxa takes steps towards you while you stepped further away from him. A loud thud echoes in the vicinity as you find yourself trapped between Anaxa’s looming aura and his master desk. The sage’s tattooed hand then brushes softly on your supple skin. Starting from your collarbone, making his way up to your neck, “I employed modifications on my genes to test my assumption - but I couldn’t activate those out of my own volition. To determine the efficacy of something, its participant should be willing. Am I right?”

As if you were at a standstill in time, your breathing hitches the longer his skin is in contact with yours. His fingers were rough, some had dry patches, as expected of a practical researcher. Yet the warmth he exudes from his touch feels foreign, a driving force that makes your stomach churn with a whirlpool of mixed emotions.

“Let’s start off with sense of sight. Close your eyes.” Your chest rises and falls, heartbeat pacing faster in each minute. “Sir—“ Unexpectedly, you follow suit to his command, shutting your eyes. Your brows knit even further, wanting to protest against this method but the words you intend to verbalize die down on your tongue in an instant.

How did he manage to make you follow suit to his command? What else did he incorporate to the component?

Darkness graces your eyes, another chilling sensation rides on your skin. It felt hot, but the second it trails away into another direction, it leaves an icy feeling, lingering.

Thousands of thoughts surface in your mind and none of them were of composure. You were astonished, confused, wanting to beg for more time to adjust but here you are being immediately toyed in Anaxa’s palms. As if acting out of desperation to break free from this predicament, a new pseudo dimension forms, to which faint lines of everything around you could be discerned, each having its distinct color.

The surroundings were pitch black, yet every object in the space had its own different hue, the lines materializing as you try to get used to this awakening. Trying to make out of whatever was happening in front of you, with enough focus, you could envision the sage leaving ephemeral licks on your skin, particularly on the back of your hand. Your jaw falls agape to which Anaxa quickly notices, the corners of his lips then tug into a boastful smirk.

It’s as if he had already put two and two together that he realized your sense of sight indeed improved, incomparable to that of a mere human’s.

“Second. Sense of hearing.” As soon as he announces his next step, he prods into your mouth with the same tattooed hand, inserting his index and middle fingers to explore your cavern of warmth. Your stomach turns as Anaxa toys with your tongue, not leaving enough space for you to breathe nor have sufficient time to process everything.

As this act unfolds, you suddenly begin to hear your saliva being mushed with his fingertips, your mouth making slick noises inside, to which you could do nothing but leave mumbles of puzzlement. “A . . . Naxa.” Every splash of the liquids inside reverberate inside your head, which further affirms Anaxa’s assumptions.

After what felt like eternity, you could finally peel your eyes open and see the view unravel before you, Anaxa being a mere hair’s breadth from your face, goosebumps rake your spine. Up close, his brows are knitted in expectation, eyes somewhat heavy-lidded in which excitement gleams from his slate monochromatic iris. With one swift movement, he stops fiddling with your tongue, taking his digits out, leaving a small trail of saliva connecting your lips to his fingertips.

“My patience is wearing thin.” He expresses, wiping away the smeared saliva from the margins of your lips with his gloved hand. Dumbfounded, you could do nothing but just lie in wait to what he’s supposed to do next. “Let’s amp up our methodology. We’ll be testing the remaining three senses simultaneously. I hope you can bear with it.”

Suddenly, your clothes dissipate into thin air, the fibers curling into little burnt cinders until they’re void of anything. “Anaxa—“ he proceeds to fervently crash his lips into yours, a surprising tang of sweetness cracks on your tastebuds. Your stature wobbles and threatens to fall, but the male had already anticipated that as he supports your weight with an arm slithered on your waist. He aids in maintaining your balance, but it was only a mere second that you were able to think straight when his free hand toys with your inner region.

With little effort, your arousal coats his fingers, muddling his skin’s red markings with a cloud white color, your scent inevitably wafts inside the laboratory. Anaxa inhales deeply, taking in everything all at once that is unfolding. Nonetheless, he proceeds, inserting his fingers into your pussy.

Caught off guard, he thrusts in and out, your walls taking the shape of his long, slender fingers. At the same time, your tongue twirls in rhythm with his, the sweet taste gradually enveloping the cranny of your mouth.

It all felt messy, as if Anaxa’s actions override one another, making everything far more overwhelming than it is prima facie. Your mind was lost, yet your body basks in the foreign sensation, pleasure emerging as you feel you were nearing your satisfaction. The male’s gloved fingers wrap around your neck after and breaks the deep kiss, “Are you ready?” He queries, taking a quick glance at your seeping cunt and trail back up to your eyes with a surprising longing gaze in them.

A second passes by, he undoes the buckles of his belt, letting everything loose as he strokes his own erection, wrapping his coated fingers around himself. You eagerly watch at every movement he does, a tantalizing view to etch in the deepest part of your memory. As he deems himself fit, he rubs his tip on your entrance, the position possibly adding up to the struggle.

His breath drops, feeling a short wave of satisfaction once he gets a taste of your slicked pussy. “Time to prove my hypothesis was right.” Anaxa rams inside you, your walls enveloping around his girth as he struggles to keep himself still. “Anaxa . . !” His tangled thoughts were abruptly cut off as he hears your plea, spiraling into an abyss of pleasure as an intense gaze locks his eye with yours.

“Spit.” He orders, a vague one in which you cannot crack immediately. A breathy moan bubbles from his throat subsequently, a rare occurrence of Anaxa showing vulnerability. Regardless, he expounds. “Gather an appropriate amount of your saliva.” As if obedience was coded into your personality, you purse your lips together. “Let it trickle down your chest.”

You follow suit to his command, slightly parting your mouth open, leaving just enough space for it to stream down your dewed skin, leaving such a sticky feeling. The professor wastes no time as his hands glide up to your tits, fingers fidgeting with your perked nipples, lubricating them with your own spit. He traps the buds within his calloused fingertips as you grant him the most lewd noises you’ve ever made in the entirety of your life.

Anaxa wasn’t the type of person to hunger for indulgences like this. But upon witnessing a remarkable sight right in front of him, impulse rush in as he digs into your mounds as well, the tip of his tongue caressing your nipples.

“It’s too warm . . sweet . . and hot.” Mindless musings come undone the margins of your lips, making the sage’s libido hike even more. Additionally, these testaments of yours reinforce the data he supplied in his test drive journal for this study, another victorious feat for him it appears. “Very good.”

He simpers, starting the momentum of his thrusts to your body, nice and slow in the beginning yet with such intensity and impact in each push. Naughty noises echo inside, along the gibberish you’ve been rambling for a while which were descriptions of the changes occurring in your body. Anaxa encourages it, playing along as if he was able to comprehend your barely coherent sentences.

“Sir, I . . . feel like I’m being suffocated.” You yelp, first time among your endless prattles he was able to understand something, your hips grinding along Anaxa’s dick as he fills you to the brim. You look down and see how easy it was for him to prod into your folds, the very entrance curling around the base of his cock with such longing and excitement. “You’re doing great.” He manages to say in between thrusts and hefty breaths, “What else?”

Anaxa’s praises reverberate in your head, like a badge of excellence as he sees you worthy to be his research partner and that in itself is a privilege. Gradually, the male’s pent up sexual frustration reaches its end as strings of cum sprawl out, Anaxa withdraws just in time. A searing heat of temptation pools inside your body, thoughts clouded with nothing but pure carnal desire instilled by the sage.

“If . . If you’re willing to . . as well, I’d be honored to do more of these with you.”