What kind of girl do you think I am?

<p><pre><code> The million-dollar question is interesting *because it forces her to really decide* what kind of girl she is. </code></pre> The question actually isn't very interesting at all, because the it suggests there is still a choice to be made. In reality, most people have made that choice long ago and we know that they have their consequentialist price. The price may be a million dollars, saving a hundred people's lives, getting revenge or another non-monetary reward, but there is a price. Already before the million-dollar question, we know that we may assume she definitely <i>is</i> 'that kind of girl'. Almost every girl, and every guy, is 'that kind of girl', because they will trade their affections for what the other party offers. Be it under the guise of love or not.<p>Going into a business negotiation thinking either you or them are deontologists is selfdeception that will hinder you in your negotiations.

(it's not worth noting but i'm going to do so anyway: we know what kind of guy he is before we know what kind of girl she is, but no one even points that out. we focus on her because she's indecisive?)

In business you are rarely forced to murder or whore yourself out. You are, however, constantly faced with changing your direction, compromising your vision or similar, all for some potential upside and downside. That's the nature of business, and trying to tie it to moral questions doesn't do justice to the line of reasoning one should employ.<p>Of course you should be moral, but most business questions aren't a question of morality, but of direction and the most appropriate path to achieve your objectives.

It is the characterisation of moral systems as <i>either</i> 'deontological' <i>or</i> 'teleological' which I find invalid, thus undermining the usefulness of this here debate.<p>In the articles terms, you could be moral according to the category of your actions, or according to the consequences of your actions. The first one ignores reality ('whatever happens, don't lie'), and the second one negates judgement ('the right action depends on the consequences, and the consequences of the consequences, and the consequences of... <i>ad infinitum</i>' an endless, useless subjectivism). They can be sidestepped by applying judgement according to reality <i>and</i> a measurable standard of value, eg. self-interest. You could call this contextual or objective morality.

A thought: if someone offered me a trillion dollars to kill a person, I would get trillion-dollar loan, invent brain-uploading and emulation technology with it, copy the person into the machine, and then kill them.<p>To put that more simply: past a certain point, the idea of marginal value in a cost/benefit analysis breaks down, because the benefit "changes the game." (That is, creates a discontinuity in the valuation curve.) A million dollars "changes the game" of your life. $100 doesn't.

I think that what's wrong is the idea that a single decision, specially one involving sex and money, can determine 'the kind of person' you are. Extremely simplistic and unrealistic point of view.

Here is a collection of supposed attributions for that quotation:<p><a href="http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/what_kind_of_woman_do_you_take_me_for_madam_weve_already_established_that_c/" rel="nofollow">http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/what...</a><p>It seems rather hard to pin down the original source!

I feel like the problem with this is that sleeping with someone for money is not inherently unethical, i.e. it hurts no one. Certainly, if you were to replace it with "kill a person", the spread of answers would change significantly.

Is it just me or is there someone going on a downvoting spree here? I've seen at least 8 comments at 0, and I only checked the thread twice. It's kind of weird, since there's quite a high karma threshold for downvoting.

The guy's main point is that you should decide which girl you are: the "Consequentialist" (relativist), or the "Categoricalist" (absolutist).<p>He said: "... I find it helpful, before I consider a dilemma, to at least debate whether I’m in that girl’s situation, and what kind of girl I’m going to be for this particular question..."<p>This shows that he is the "Consequentialist" girl.