@misc{jackson1974goldschmidts1,
    author = "Jackson, J. F",
    title = "Goldschmidt's dilemma resolved",
    year = "1974",
    howpublished = "Notes on the larval behavior of a new neotropical web-spinning Mycetophilid (Diptera): American Midland Naturalist, v. 92, p. 240-245",
    note = "talkorigins\_source = {true}; raw\_reference = {Jackson, J. F., 1974, Goldschmidt's dilemma resolved: Notes on the larval behavior of a new neotropical web-spinning Mycetophilid (Diptera): American Midland Naturalist, v. 92, p. 240-245.}"
}

@article{crossref19752862,
    title = "2862. A hairdresser's dilemma resolved",
    year = "1975",
    journal = "Food and Cosmetics Toxicology",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-6264(75)80351-8",
    doi = "10.1016/s0015-6264(75)80351-8",
    number = "3",
    openalex = "W4249501749",
    pages = "408",
    volume = "13"
}

@article{crock1978corneal,
    author = "Crock, G. W.",
    title = "Corneal Graft Dilemma Resolved by New Technology",
    year = "1978",
    journal = "Medical Journal of Australia",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1978.tb131388.x",
    doi = "10.5694/j.1326-5377.1978.tb131388.x",
    number = "3",
    openalex = "W2424932299",
    pages = "97-98",
    volume = "2"
}

@article{doi101103physrevlett401514,
    author = "East̀man, D. E. and Himpsel, F. J. and Knapp, J. A.",
    title = "Experimental Band Structure and Temperature-Dependent Magnetic Exchange Splitting of Nickel Using Angle-Resolved Photoemission",
    year = "1978",
    journal = "Physical Review Letters",
    abstract = "Using angle-resolved photoemission and synchrotron radiation, we have determined the energy-versus-momentum valence-band dispersion relations for a Ni(111) crystal. The temperature-dependent ferromagnetic exchange splitting has been directly observed. Both the $d$-band width (\ensuremath{\sim}3.4 eV at $L$) and exchange splitting (0.31 eV) are much smaller than theoretical estimates (\ensuremath{\sim}4.5 eV wide at $L$ with \ensuremath{\sim}0.7-eV splitting, respectively, at 293 K).",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.40.1514",
    doi = "10.1103/physrevlett.40.1514",
    openalex = "W2005333275"
}

@article{perkins1979a,
    author = "Perkins, Lola",
    title = "A Dilemma-Resolved",
    year = "1979",
    journal = "The English Journal",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2307/815470",
    doi = "10.2307/815470",
    number = "2",
    openalex = "W268163658",
    pages = "31",
    volume = "68"
}

@article{pate1983the,
    author = "Pate, B.B. and Waclawski, B.J. and Stefan, P.M. and Binns, C. and Ohta, T. and Hecht, M.H. and Jupiter, P.J. and Shek, M.L. and Pierce, D.T. and Swanson, N. and Celotta, R.J. and Lindau, I. and Spicer, W.E. and Rossi, G.",
    title = "The diamond (111) surface: A dilemma resolved",
    year = "1983",
    journal = "Physica B+C",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4363(83)90652-6",
    doi = "10.1016/0378-4363(83)90652-6",
    openalex = "W2152804862",
    pages = "783-785",
    volume = "117-118",
    references = "doi1010160039602877904599, doi1010160378596377900034, doi1010631555587, doi101103physrevb20624, doi101103physrevb247270, doi101103physrevlett471913, doi1011161571062, doi1011161571781, doi1011161571782, openalexw1551691610"
}

@article{lucassen2005dilemma,
    author = "Lucassen, Anneke and Parker, Michael",
    title = "Dilemma still not resolved",
    year = "2005",
    journal = "European Journal of Human Genetics",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201350",
    doi = "10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201350",
    number = "4",
    openalex = "W1980576597",
    pages = "399-400",
    volume = "13",
    references = "doi101038sjejhg5201118"
}

@article{doi101007s1067601192808,
    author = "Bartel, Christopher",
    title = "Resolving the gamer’s dilemma",
    year = "2011",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-011-9280-8",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-011-9280-8",
    openalex = "W2010797533",
    references = "doi101007s1067600891684, doi101007s1067700790951, doi101023a1021372601566, doi1011110029462400290, doi101353phl20050009"
}

@article{doi101007s108970129514x,
    author = "Hodgson, Jan and Gaff, Clara",
    title = "Enhancing Family Communication About Genetics: Ethical and Professional Dilemmas",
    year = "2012",
    journal = "Journal of Genetic Counseling",
    abstract = "When a new genetic condition is diagnosed within a family, genetic counselors often describe a sense of responsibility towards other at risk family members to be appropriately informed about their status. Successful communication of genetic information in families is contingent on many factors. While a small number of probands directly state their intention not to inform their relatives, many who do intend to communicate this information appear to be unsuccessful for a wide range of reasons and may benefit from follow up support from a genetic counselor. Drawing on the reciprocal-engagement model (REM) of genetic counseling practice we explore how enhancing family communication about genetics raises a number of ethical and professional challenges for counselors-and describe how we resolved these. A subsequent manuscript will describe the counseling framework we have developed to enhance family communication about genetics.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-012-9514-x",
    doi = "10.1007/s10897-012-9514-x",
    openalex = "W2033066080",
    references = "doi101038sjejhg5201118"
}

@article{luck2013has,
    author = "Luck, Morgan and Ellerby, Nathan",
    title = "Has Bartel resolved the gamer’s dilemma?",
    year = "2013",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9322-5",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-013-9322-5",
    number = "3",
    openalex = "W2059500708",
    pages = "229-233",
    volume = "15",
    references = "doi101007s1067600891684, doi101007s1067601192808, doi101007s1067601293101, doi101023a1021372601566, doi10108003637750500111781, doi1011110029462400290, doi101111j204483091998tb01177x, doi1011770093854807311719"
}

@article{lirugani2014dilemma,
    author = "@lirugani, @lirugani",
    title = "Dilemma resolved",
    year = "2014",
    journal = "Physics World",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-7058/27/04/37",
    doi = "10.1088/2058-7058/27/04/37",
    number = "04",
    openalex = "W4241160117",
    pages = "22-22",
    volume = "27"
}

@article{burke2015nuclear,
    author = "Burke, Brian",
    title = "Nuclear dilemma resolved",
    year = "2015",
    journal = "Nature",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14527",
    doi = "10.1038/nature14527",
    number = "7555",
    openalex = "W1574196158",
    pages = "159-160",
    volume = "522",
    references = "doi101016jcell201203032, doi101016jcell201302046, doi101016jcell201409012, doi101038nature07961, doi101038nature14408, doi101038nature14503, doi101038ncb12011086, doi101083jcb201103171, doi101126science1063957, doi101128jvi0057409"
}

@book{doi1010079783319465951,
    author = "Young, Garry",
    title = "Resolving the Gamer’s Dilemma",
    year = "2016",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46595-1",
    doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-46595-1",
    openalex = "W2551961757"
}

@article{doi101021acsearthspacechem8b00140,
    author = "Walters, Wendell W. and Chai, Jiajue and Hastings, Meredith G.",
    title = "Theoretical Phase Resolved Ammonia–Ammonium Nitrogen Equilibrium Isotope Exchange Fractionations: Applications for Tracking Atmospheric Ammonia Gas-to-Particle Conversion",
    year = "2018",
    journal = "ACS Earth and Space Chemistry",
    abstract = "Nitrogen (N) equilibrium isotope fractionation (15α) involving gaseous, dissolved, and solid phases of ammonia (NH3) and ammonium (NH4+) (e.g., NH3(g)–NH3(aq)–NH4+(aq)–NH4+(s)) represents a fundamental chemical process that has important implications for understanding the environmental dynamics involving NHx (NH3 + NH4+). However, recent literature disagrees with early experimental results from Urey and co-workers, suggesting the need for an update on theoretical estimates. Here, we have calculated theoretical 15α values for NH4+(g)/NH3(g), NH3(aq)/NH3(g), NH4+(aq)/NH3(g), NH4+(aq)/NH3(aq), and NH4+(s)/NH3(g) using HF/6-31G(d) and B3LYP/6-31G(d) levels of theory. Overall, our theoretical calculated values matched experimental data reported by Urey and co-workers, with best agreement obtained at the HF/6-31G(d) level of theory with solvent effect accounted for using water cluster calculations. Our calculated results have important implications for tracing NH3 gas-to-particle phase conversions that may have distinctive isotopic separation factors (Δ15δNH4+/NH3 = δ15 N(NH4+) – δ15 N(NH3)) between N isotopic compositions (δ15 N) of NH4+ and NH3 depending on its conversion mechanism. While further experimental work is necessary to validate our predicted isotope effects over the considered temperature range, this work demonstrates the potential of N isotopic measurements of phase-resolved NHx to better understand its dynamics in the atmosphere.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.8b00140",
    doi = "10.1021/acsearthspacechem.8b00140",
    openalex = "W2900869680",
    references = "openalexw1551691610"
}

@incollection{crossref2019julius,
    title = "Julius Goldschmidt und Robert Goldschmidt",
    year = "2019",
    booktitle = "Juden im Sport in der Weimarer Republik und im Nationalsozialismus",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.5771/9783835343177-802",
    doi = "10.5771/9783835343177-802",
    openalex = "W4251673442",
    pages = "802-804"
}

@article{doi101007s1067601909518x,
    author = "Kjeldgaard‐Christiansen, Jens",
    title = "Splintering the gamer’s dilemma: moral intuitions, motivational assumptions, and action prototypes",
    year = "2019",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "The gamer’s dilemma (Luck in Ethics Inf Technol 11(1):31–36, 2009) asks whether any ethical features distinguish virtual pedophilia, which is generally considered impermissible, from virtual murder, which is generally considered permissible. If not, this equivalence seems to force one of two conclusions: either both virtual pedophilia and virtual murder are permissible, or both virtual pedophilia and virtual murder are impermissible. In this article, I attempt, first, to explain the psychological basis of the dilemma. I argue that the two different action types picked out by “virtual pedophilia” and “virtual murder” set very different expectations for their token instantiations that systematically bias judgments of permissibility. In particular, the proscription of virtual pedophilia rests on intuitions about immoral desire, sexual violations, and a schematization of a powerful adult offending against an innocent child. I go on to argue that these differences between virtual pedophilia and virtual murder may be ethically relevant. Precisely because virtual pedophilia is normally aversive in a way that virtual murder is not, we plausibly expect virtual pedophilia to invite abnormal and immorally desirous forms of engagement.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-019-09518-x",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-019-09518-x",
    openalex = "W2985863112",
    references = "doi101007s1067601192808, doi101007s1067601293101, doi101007s106760159381x, doi101007s1067601894557, doi101016b9780124072367000024, doi101037003329091332273, doi1010370033295x1084814, doi101037a0021847, doi101080095150892013838752, doi10109301992700230010001, doi101126science1137651, doi1011620011526042365555, doi105860choice261805, doi105860choice497185, luck2013has"
}

@article{doi101007s10676019095221,
    author = "Öhman, Carl",
    title = "Introducing the pervert’s dilemma: a contribution to the critique of Deepfake Pornography",
    year = "2019",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract Recent technological innovation has made video doctoring increasingly accessible. This has given rise to Deepfake Pornography, an emerging phenomenon in which Deep Learning algorithms are used to superimpose a person’s face onto a pornographic video. Although to most people, Deepfake Pornography is intuitively unethical, it seems difficult to justify this intuition without simultaneously condemning other actions that we do not ordinarily find morally objectionable, such as sexual fantasies. In the present article, I refer to this contradiction as the pervert’s dilemma. I propose that the method of Levels of Abstraction, a philosophical mode of enquiry inspired by Formal Methods in computer science, can be employed to formulate at least one possible solution to the dilemma. From this perspective, the permissibility of some actions appears to depend on the degree to which they are abstracted from their natural context. I conclude that the dilemma can only be solved when considered at low levels of abstractions, when Deepfakes are situated in the macro-context of gender inequality.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-019-09522-1",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-019-09522-1",
    openalex = "W2989861661",
    references = "doi101007s1067600891684, doi101007s1067601192808, doi101007s106760159381x"
}

@article{doi101111jaac12634,
    author = "Bourne, Craig and Bourne, Emily Caddick",
    title = "Players, Characters, and the Gamer's Dilemma",
    year = "2019",
    journal = "Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism",
    abstract = "Is there any difference between playing video games in which the player's character commits murder and video games in which the player's character commits pedophilic acts? Morgan Luck's “Gamer's Dilemma” has established this question as a puzzle concerning notions of permissibility and harm. We propose that a fruitful alternative way to approach the question is through an account of aesthetic engagement. We develop an alternative to the dominant account of the relationship between players and the actions of their characters, and argue that the ethical difference between so‐called “virtual murder” and “virtual pedophilia” is to be understood in terms of the fiction‐making resources available to players. We propose that the relevant considerations for potential players to navigate concern (1) attempting to make certain characters intelligible, and (2) using aspects of oneself as resources for homomorphic representation.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12634",
    doi = "10.1111/jaac.12634",
    openalex = "W2940916953",
    references = "doi1010029781444310177, doi101007s1067600891684, doi101007s1067601092506, doi101007s1067601293101, doi101007s106760159381x, doi101017cbo9780511674716, doi101093aristoteliansupp68127, doi101111jaac12269, doi1023072185918, doi1023072678446, doi102307431705, doi105860choice481389, luck2013has"
}

@article{doi101007s1067602209655w,
    author = "Montefiore, Thomas and Formosa, Paul",
    title = "Resisting the Gamer’s Dilemma",
    year = "2022",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract Intuitively, many people seem to hold that engaging in acts of virtual murder in videogames is morally permissible, whereas engaging in acts of virtual child molestation is morally impermissible. The Gamer’s Dilemma (Luck in Ethics Inf Technol 11:31–36, 2009) challenges these intuitions by arguing that it is unclear whether there is a morally relevant difference between these two types of virtual actions. There are two main responses in the literature to this dilemma. First, attempts to resolve the dilemma by defending an account of the relevant moral differences between virtual murder and virtual child molestation. Second, attempts to dissolve the dilemma by undermining the intuitions that ground it. In this paper, we argue that a narrow version of the Gamer’s Dilemma seems to survive attempts to resolve or dissolve it away entirely, since neither approach seems to be able to solve the dilemma for all cases. We thus provide a contextually sensitive version of the dilemma that more accurately tracks onto the intuitions of gamers. However, we also argue that the intuitions that ground the narrow version of the Dilemma may not have a moral foundation, and we put forward alternative non-moral normative foundations that seem to better account for the remaining intuitive difference between the two types of virtual actions. We also respond to proposed solutions to the Gamer’s Dilemma in novel ways and set out areas for future empirical work in this area.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09655-w",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-022-09655-w",
    openalex = "W4288096568",
    references = "doi101007s1050800893999, doi101007s1067600891684, doi101007s1067601092506, doi101007s1067601192808, doi101007s1067601293101, doi101007s106760159381x, doi101007s1067601894557, doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s10676019095221, doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1140602100455y, doi101023a1013802119431, doi101023a1021372601566, doi101037a0018251, doi101111jaac12634, doi1011770093854807311719, doi101353phl20050009, doi1054062152112359407, luck2013has"
}

@article{doi101007s1067602309705x,
    author = "Luck, Morgan",
    title = "Has Montefiore and Formosa resisted the Gamer’s Dilemma?",
    year = "2023",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract Montefiore and Formosa (Ethics Inf Technol 24:31, 2022) provide a useful way of narrowing the Gamer’s Dilemma to cases where virtual murder seems morally permissible, but not virtual child molestation. They then resist the dilemma by theorising that the intuitions supporting it are not moral. In this paper, I consider this theory to determine whether the dilemma has been successfully resisted. I offer reason to think that, when considering certain variations of the dilemma, Montefiore and Formosa’s theory may not be the most likely theory available to us.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09705-x",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-023-09705-x",
    openalex = "W4378070156",
    references = "doi101007s1067601894557, doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101007s1140602100455y"
}

@article{doi101007s10676023097100,
    author = "Ulbricht, Samuel",
    title = "A Kantian response to the Gamer’s Dilemma",
    year = "2023",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract The Gamer’s Dilemma consists of three intuitively plausible but conflicting assertions: (i) Virtual murder is morally permissible. (ii) Virtual child molestation is morally forbidden. (iii) There is no relevant moral difference between virtual murder and virtual child molestation in computer games. Numerous attempts to resolve (or dissolve) the Gamer’s Dilemma line the field of computer game ethics. Mostly, the phenomenon is approached using expressivist argumentation: Reprehensible virtual actions express something immoral in their performance but are not immoral by themselves. Consequentialists, on the other hand, claim that the immorality of virtual actions arises from their harmful consequences. I argue that both approaches have serious difficulties meeting the moral challenge posed by the Gamer’s Dilemma. They tend to confuse the morality of in-game actions either with the morality of their real-world counterparts or with the morality of games as objects. Following this critical analysis, I will develop a Kantian argument and defend it against two objections. So far, deontological responses to the Gamer’s Dilemma have been sought in vain. Yet, with Kant, its moral challenge can be met by looking at the gamer’s reasons. From this perspective, the Gamer’s Dilemma is based on a false assumption: the moral status of gaming acts does not derive from a normative equation with their real-world counterparts but only from their justifications.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09710-0",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-023-09710-0",
    openalex = "W4383682363",
    references = "doi101007s1067601894557, doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101007s1140602100455y"
}

@article{doi101007s1067602309711z,
    author = "Coghlan, Thomas and Cox, Damian",
    title = "Between death and suffering: resolving the gamer’s dilemma",
    year = "2023",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract The gamer’s dilemma, initially proposed by Luck (Ethics and Information Technology 11(1):31–36, 2009) posits a moral comparison between in-game acts of murder and in-game acts of paedophilia within single-player videogames. Despite each activity lacking the obvious harms of their real-world equivalents, common intuitions suggest an important difference between them. Some responses to the dilemma suggest that intuitive responses to the two cases are based on important differences between the acts themselves or their social meaning. Others challenge the fundamental assumptions of the dilemma. In this paper, we identify and explore key imaginative and emotional differences in how certain types of in-game violence are experienced by players, consider how these differences factor into the moral lives of players, and use these insights to resolve the dilemma. The view we develop is that the key moral emotion in offensive video gameplay is self-repugnance. This is not repugnance of the act one directs a game character to perform in the game, nor repugnance of the character one plays. It is repugnance of oneself in playing the game. If self-repugnance is a fitting emotional response to playing a videogame, then this is prima facie grounds for thinking it is wrong to play the videogame. Our approach to the gamer’s dilemma is to distinguish the fittingness conditions of self-repugnance from the fittingness conditions of other moral emotions as they pertain to playing videogames. We argue that because of the virtual character of the actions performed in video games, self-repugnance is a fitting response to particular kinds of offensive gameplay. On the other hand, in-game murder is not invariably a fitting ground for self-repugnance. We argue that this difference is grounded in imaginative responses to the harm of death and the harms of profound suffering. Our task is to explain and justify this difference in fittingness conditions and use this to resolve the gamer’s dilemma.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-023-09711-z",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-023-09711-z",
    openalex = "W4383552448",
    references = "doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101007s1140602100455y"
}

@article{doi101007s13347023006605,
    author = "Montefiore, Thomas and Formosa, Paul",
    title = "Crossing the Fictional Line: Moral Graveness, the Gamer’s Dilemma, and the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far",
    year = "2023",
    journal = "Philosophy \& Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract The Gamer’s Dilemma refers to the philosophical challenge of justifying the intuitive difference people seem to see between the moral permissibility of enacting virtual murder and the moral impermissibility of enacting virtual child molestation in video games (Luck Ethics and Information Technology, 1:31, 2009). Recently, Luck in Philosophia, 50:1287–1308, 2022 has argued that the Gamer’s Dilemma is actually an instance of a more general “paradox”, which he calls the “paradox of treating wrongdoing lightly”, and he proposes a graveness resolution to this paradox. In response, we argue for four key claims. First, we accept Luck’s expansion of the Gamer’s Dilemma to be applicable to a wider set of media, but give a novel recasting of this in terms of the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. Second, we develop a novel criticism of Luck in Philosophia, 50:1287–1308, 2022 graveness resolution to this broader paradox. Third, we argue that the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far helps to expose an implicit moralism in the Gamer’s Dilemma literature when compared to relevant nearby literatures about other forms of media. Fourth, we consider a range of non-moral, cultural and media conventions that plausibly help to dissolve the intuitive moral gap between non-sexual and sexual violence that is central to this paradox.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-023-00660-5",
    doi = "10.1007/s13347-023-00660-5",
    openalex = "W4386293648",
    references = "doi101007s1067601894557, doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101007s108920053508y, doi101007s1140602100455y, doi10103700223514654613, doi101038nrn1651, doi101093aristoteliansupp49167, doi101162pres199211120, doi101371journalpone0000039, doi1023072087716, doi1023072220100, doi1023072678446, luck2013has, openalexw1511827303"
}

@article{doi1010800144929x20232178837,
    author = "Formosa, Paul and Montefiore, Thomas and Ghasemi, Omid and McEwan, Mitchell",
    title = "An empirical investigation of the Gamer’s Dilemma: a mixed methods study of whether the dilemma exists",
    year = "2023",
    journal = "Behaviour and Information Technology",
    abstract = "The Gamer’s Dilemma challenges us to justify the moral difference between enacting virtual murder and virtual child molestation in video games. The Dilemma relies for its argumentative force on the claim that there is an intuitive moral difference between these acts, with the former intuited as morally acceptable and the latter as morally unacceptable. However, there has been no empirical investigation of these claims. To explore these issues, we developed an experimental survey study in which participants were asked to reflect on imaginary video game scenarios as part of a 2 (undertake virtual murder or molestation) X 2 (against an adult or child) X 2 (in a high or low realism virtual environment) factorial design. We found that there was a significant difference between people’s views about virtual murder and virtual molestation. Whether the virtual act was performed against an adult or child was non-significant in most conditions, whereas whether it was performed in a high or low realism virtual environment was significant in most conditions. Gender did not impact these results, whereas perceived gaming experience, hours of video game play per week, and integrity did. These results provide an empirical grounding for future discussions of the Gamer's Dilemma.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929x.2023.2178837",
    doi = "10.1080/0144929x.2023.2178837",
    openalex = "W4320728713",
    references = "doi101007s1067601894557, doi101007s1067601909518x, doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w"
}

@article{doi101007s10676024097666,
    author = "Young, Garry",
    title = "The gamer’s dilemma: an expressivist response",
    year = "2024",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract In this paper, I support a hybrid form of expressivism called constructive ecumenical expressivism (CEE) which I have previously used (to attempt) to resolve the gamer’s dilemma. (Young, 2016. Resolving the gamer’s dilemma. London: Palgrave Macmillan.) In support of CEE, I argue that the various other attempts at either resolving, dissolving or resisting the dilemma are consistent with CEE’s moral framework. That is, with its way of explaining what a claim to morality is, with how moral norms are established, with the role intuition is able to play in establishing these norms, and therefore with how the gamer’s dilemma can be resolved. I also demonstrate, more broadly, how CEE advocates robust relativism as a means of justifying the constructed moral norm’s normative credentials, and therefore how one society’s norm can be judged morally superior to another’s.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09766-6",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-024-09766-6",
    openalex = "W4394011408",
    references = "doi101007s13347023006605, doi101111jaac12634"
}

@article{doi101007s10676024097817,
    author = "Luck, Morgan",
    title = "Can we solve the Gamer’s Dilemma by resisting it?",
    year = "2024",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract The Gamer’s Dilemma (Luck, 2009a) is a paradox concerning the moral permissibility of two types of acts performed within computer games. Some attempt to resolve the dilemma by finding a relevant difference between these two acts (Bartel, 2012; Patridge, 2013; Young, 2016; Nader, 2020; Kjeldgaard-Christiansen, 2020; and Milne \& Ivankovic, 2021), or to dissolve the dilemma by arguing that the permissibility of these acts is not as they seem (Ali, 2015; Ramirez, 2020). More recently some have attempted to resist the dilemma by undermining the intuitions supporting it (Montefiore \& Formosa, 2022; Formosa et al., 2023). The purpose of this paper is to consider what might follow from such resistance.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09781-7",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-024-09781-7",
    openalex = "W4399464831",
    references = "doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101111jaac12634"
}

@article{doi101007s10676024098070,
    author = "Montefiore, Thomas and Luck, Morgan",
    title = "The repugnant resolution: has Coghlan \& Cox resolved the Gamer’s Dilemma?",
    year = "2024",
    journal = "Ethics and Information Technology",
    abstract = "Abstract Coghlan and Cox (Between death and suffering: Resolving the gamer’s dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology) offer a new resolution to the Gamer’s Dilemma (Luck, The Gamer’s Dilemma. Ethics and Information Technology). They argue that, while it is fitting for a person committing virtual child molestation to feel self-repugnance, it is not fitting for a person committing virtual murder to feel the same, and the fittingness of this feeling indicates each act’s moral permissibility. The aim of this paper is to determine whether this resolution – the repugnant resolution – successfully resolves the Gamer’s Dilemma. We argue that it does not.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09807-0",
    doi = "10.1007/s10676-024-09807-0",
    openalex = "W4403360635",
    references = "doi101111jaac12634"
}

@article{doi1010800951508920242354432,
    author = "Montefiore, Thomas and Formosa, Paul and Polito, Vince",
    title = "Extending the Gamer’s Dilemma: empirically investigating the paradox of fictionally going too far across media",
    year = "2024",
    journal = "Philosophical Psychology",
    abstract = "The Gamer's Dilemma is based on the intuitions that in single-player video games fictional acts of murder are seen as morally acceptable whereas fictional acts of sexual assault are seen as morally unacceptable. Recently, it has been suggested that these intuitions may apply across different forms of media as part of a broader Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. This study aims to empirically explore this issue by determining whether fictional murder is seen as more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across different media types, and whether audio-visuality and the degree of agency afforded by the medium influences these judgments. An experimental survey study was developed where participants responded to imaginary fictional scenarios as part of a 2 (engages with fictional murder or fictional sexual assault) X 2 (in a high or low agency) X 2 (audio-visual or non-audio-visual medium) factorial design. It was found that fictional murder was seen to be more morally acceptable than fictional sexual assault across all media types, providing empirical support for the Paradox of Fictionally Going Too Far. It was also found that the audio-visuality and degree of agency influenced judgments of moral acceptability.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432",
    doi = "10.1080/09515089.2024.2354432",
    openalex = "W4397290009",
    references = "doi101007s10676020095588, doi101007s1067602209655w, doi101007s1140602100455y, doi101007s13347023006605"
}

@article{doi101093pqpqaf048,
    author = "Luck, Morgan and Montefiore, Thomas and Bartel, Christopher",
    title = "The Robo-Barbie Dilemma: How should we treat artificial moral patients?",
    year = "2025",
    journal = "The Philosophical Quarterly",
    abstract = "Abstract Artificial moral patients (or AMPs) are those things successfully made to resemble moral patients, but are not. They are artificial both in the sense that they are made by us (artefacts), and that they are not a real instance of what they are made to resemble (artifice). ChatGPT, sex dolls, social robots, and non-player characters are all examples of AMPs. As these technologies start to resemble humans with greater accuracy the question as to how we should treat them becomes increasingly important. We consider whether work on the Gamer's Dilemma, a puzzle concerning virtual wrongdoings, may provide a useful framework for addressing this question.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/pq/pqaf048",
    doi = "10.1093/pq/pqaf048",
    openalex = "W4410731956",
    references = "doi101007s13347023006605"
}

@article{doi10117715554120251319173,
    author = "Montefiore, Thomas and Formosa, Paul",
    title = "Dark Patterns Meet the Gamer's Dilemma: Contrasting Morally Objectionable Content with Systems in Video Games",
    year = "2025",
    journal = "Games and Culture",
    abstract = "Much of the philosophical discussion of video game ethics is dominated by the literature on the Gamer's Dilemma, which forces us to focus on the ethics of certain forms of extreme virtual content in video games, such as virtual murder or molestation. While a focus on the ethics of video game content is important, we argue that scrutinizing the ethics of video game systems is needed to properly capture the full range of ethical concerns raised by video games. Drawing on a distinction between intravirtual and extravirtual effects, we identify ethical issues with video game content and, by linking to the dark patterns literature, video game systems. To illustrate our view, we give examples of how a game can appear to have morally objectionable content without the game being, at least clearly, morally objectionable, and how a game can appear to be morally unobjectionable despite having morally objectionable systems.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120251319173",
    doi = "10.1177/15554120251319173",
    openalex = "W4407557330",
    references = "doi101007s13347023006605"
}