"Um, is there an ethics class because you want us to learn it?" ventures Bird.

"I do want you to learn it!" the professor says approvingly. "However, that is not the reason there is an ethics class. Anyone else?"

"Because someone thought it was funny?" Tom offers.

"Ding ding ding!" the professor says, clapping. "That is the correct answer. Please feel free to experience the warm glow of satisfaction. Someone - namely, Dean Mesmerra - thought it would be very funny if there were an ethics class at this school. In fairness, she also thought it would exercise your growing minds and cause you to think in a bit more depth about what you're doing here. And I'm here to make sure it does! My name is Semiramis Vesmarran; you may call me Professor Vesmarran, or if you like you may call me Sahar. I'm going to be telling you about the ethics of mind control."

This is so far outside of Chantal's previous educational experience.

"I'm intrigued by the proposition that you can ethically mind-control people!" Edmund says brightly. "I was kind of under the impression ethics had gone out the window at the outset."

"That's probably because you have a limited understanding of ethics," Sahar says. "You can easily have an ethical system which permits of mind control - and even if your system is strict enough that control per se is disallowed, there are many things you'll learn here that you can apply freely, or at least, under certain circumstances."

"I was mostly thinking I'd just use the things I learned on my enemies. Are you saying something different?"

"Very much so. Mind control can be used in many fascinating ways without violating even the most stringent ethical principles. Take the example of controlling someone with their advance consent - for example, to cure an addiction, or to ensure ethical conduct by soldiers. Almost any ethical system will accept this. Only a few, however, would accept turning someone into your willing slave, and most of those do not really deserve to be called ethical systems. The distinction is not sharp, but it is certainly present."

(Oh no, she has a question but she doesn't have the courage to ask it. She bites her lip.)

Bird has no such qualms. "Why can't you call something an ethical system if it accepts turning people into willing slaves?" she wonders. "Everyone does it at home, and I think they have ethical systems there."

Sahar hums thoughtfully. "Let's look at a different angle. I might, if I were good at metalwork, create a sword. It would have a sharp blade, and a hilt, and I could use it to hurt people. But I'm not good at metalwork. If I tried to make a sword, it would be blunt, and bent, and it would look completely hideous, and I would not be able to hurt people with it effectively. The sword I made would not be a very good sword, would it? I, for one, might not call it a sword at all. That is the rhetorical point that I am making with regards to ethical systems. Yes, miss Myers?"

"Oh, um, I just—I wanted to know whether, when you said willing slave, you meant that they'd been willing beforehand, or—not. Because I think it makes a difference. Ethically speaking."

"I meant willing after the fact - there's certainly a difference, excellent point. With an unwilling subject, no matter how delighted they may be after you've done your work, the fact remains that someone's natural rights have been violated. That may not matter to some of you! But it matters to others."

Cautious nod.

Bird, meanwhile, is still chewing over the sword analogy.

"In my home country - well, in the country in which I usually teach - almost all forms of mind control and mental alteration per se are strictly forbidden. It is considered impractical to verify after the fact that the 'victim' consented beforehand, and in many cases irrelevant. I consider this to be regrettable. There exist those who would simply be more comfortable in a different mind. There exist those who cannot be happy without substantial adjustments. However, consent is paramount. Unless, that is, a significantly greater virtue is served by the violation of said consent. Let's look at the example of a species with an overpowered reproductive drive, a maltreated slave caste, an inability to function in a universe containing people who do not respect their religious traditions, and a bone-deep attachment to all of these traits..."

She begins to explain the species in question.

Partway through this explanation, Bird abruptly interrupts, "But then what's the purpose of an ethical system?"

"To limit our prospective actions in such a way that we do not harm others in ways we cannot countenance while seeking our own happiness," Sahar says immediately. "An ethical system which does not reduce harm is a failed ethical system in the same way that a legal system which did not outlaw murder, theft or rape would be a poorly thought-out legal system, no matter how internally consistent either might happen to be."

"...but then what's 'ways we cannot countenance'? Isn't that just... not doing things you already didn't want to do...? Or is the problem that figuring out which things you don't want to do is very hard?"

"It's very hard," Sahar says quietly. "You may not know you've hurt someone until later. Or you may not think it matters right here, right now. Having a strong and internally consistent ethical system isn't a perfect defense, either. You may never be able to live your life without hurting someone, and the only thing you can do about it is say - 'I guess I can live with that, because here I am, living with it.' But knowing your ethics - knowing what you believe - it helps."

"Hmm." Time to think about that for a while.

"What if we don't care?" Tom asks. "What if hurting people isn't a problem for us?"

Edmund shrinks into his chair, looking profoundly embarrassed.

Sahar looks at Tom with an expression of deepest distaste. "I suppose you won't get much out of this class, then. But you'll still have to attend it, I'm afraid. Perhaps you'll learn something."