I have thought about many of the ethical principles of using pheromone products. When you take everything into consideration, I feel that anyone who undestands the benefits of pheromones will use it- and some may never admit it. Why would anyone not want to be more confident in social interactions?
Not so fast. There are ways some people can be “swayed” by chemicals alone, and perhaps some of these chemicals are pheromones.
As I’ve mentioned in another thread, I’ve been experimenting with AD’s and other companies’ pheromone products in various forms of competitions. In the course of this testing, I’ve found that the use of a particular product (or at least some component of it) seems to be well correlated to and could very likely be responsible for triggering episodes of migraines in a person among a group of competitors. In these cases this usually very strong competitor was “swayed” to the point of dropping out of a competition in one instance and doing uncharacteristically poorly in others.
This unexpected (and unintentional) “competitive advantage” for all the other competitors in the event occurred during sporting events. But dropping a susceptible person by inducing a migraine could leave them at a serious disadvantage at a singles bar as well 
You didnt read my whole statement…
The intention of the user. I dont know what sport we are referring to but if its a contest to find the “best” and the best wasn’t there then no matter who won they really are not the best are they ? Ethically if a person knew something he/she was wearing was causing his headaches and they continued to use it to their advantage to win that is not sport. In sport the participants want to compete with the best of the best. If you haven’t won competing against the strongest competitor then you really haven’t won.
Even when used in the competing for attention pheromones are only a small part of attraction and influence. Pheromones can attract attention, respect, emotion etc etc… but they can not hold that attention, respect, emotion, that is up to you. Its why we mention congruence so often in here.
However you did mention this was unintentional and its not likely it was a pheromonal response. Probably more to do with the carrier or scent. Some people are very sensitive to perfumes and colognes which is why many work places and competitions do not allow the use of them. I dont believe that pheromones alone can cause enough influence in sport or competition to help a person win nor do I think pheromones alone are enough to cause attraction respect or any other emotion. They are just one small part of a bigger picture.
Tisha
Companies that have budget can advertise on TV, companies that don’t - can’t. It is proven that commercials influence our purchase decision making. Is that unethical or unfair? How about hypnosis or NLP?
In my opinion it is OK to use any legally available tools and/or methods at our disposal.
The intention of the user? Don’t people take ethics courses anymore?
There are many systems and approaches to ethics. The intention of the actor is completely immaterial in a large number of them. Probably even in the majority of them.
The migraine type episodes for this individual seem to actually correlate to the use of certain molecule(s) and not the carrier or cover scents.
Most likely the pheromone use is due to the carrier scent comment by tisha is probably because she’s been around for a while, knows her knowledge, and poured through countless reports and has some sort of authority when making statements like that. A decades worth of pheromone usage, you can bet she knows something.
As for the ethics comment, what exactly do you mean.
Elaborate on what you meant by "
There are many systems and approaches to ethics. The intention of the actor is completely immaterial in a large number of them. Probably even in the majority of them."
People dont need to take a course to understand a harmful intention from a unharmful intention. If you do then you have bigger problems then understanding ethics.
Ethics are simply a part of philosophy that covers the issue of morals. Morality is simply decisions based on the intention of good and bad, right and wrong. Harmful and non harmful.
However I am well versed in the branches of ethics.
And you know this how ? Did you separate the molecules from the carrier ?
Either way…Again you did not read my whole response. Read the sentence I wrote before what you quoted.
Scientifically you can not say it was the pheromone nor can you say it was the carrier. Each one would need to be tested on its own. Your just assuming it was the molecule and in science you assume nothing.
I said not likely because people are exposed to pheromone naturally in both high levels and low levels everyday without suffering from headaches. If it were the pheromone molecule alone being exposed to people would give this guy debilitating headaches.
Before you argue that synthetic pheromones are in a higher dose let me remind you they come no where near the amount a crowd of people are emitting. Does this gentlemen get headaches in crowds ? If he participates in sporting events where people are fit and naturally emitting huge amounts of natural pheromones I highly doubt it. (Take note of the word doubt please)
Is there a possibility that it was the molecules ? Yes but its not likely and the test you conducted proves nothing but that you made assumptions.
Tisha
Whether they took any courses or not, someone who thinks ethics require considering the actor’s intentions has a big problem understanding ethics.
It’s called research, experimentation and the scientific method.
Effectively yes.
It’s quite handy AD has some products available in multiple fragrance packages and the experimones. It’s also handy that other companies use some of the molecules but with different carriers. It’s also damn handy to have a buddy with access to a MS and NMR.
Made Assumptions? Such as your conclusions and commenting on results, tests, methods, data, you know absolutely nothing about?
First…
The problem is you made a statement here without mentioning your method or how you came to this conclusion so frankly I dont take it seriously.
Not only that but you did not mention replicating your results. The individuals headache could have been caused by many factors. You only mentioned one individual showing this reaction.
Second…
Again you ignore the word LIKELY.
I never stated it was a fact that some molecules may or may not cause headaches. I stated its not likely and I dont agree with your theory.
If you do not reveal your findings and fully explain how you experimented then people have no choice to make assumptions. Are we just supposed to believe it causes headaches because you said so (snort) I dont think so.
Frankly I can tell from your post this is not about my opinion but more of a problem you have with me since you seem to be so argumentative concerning my opinion.
Tisha
What exactly I meant was what I wrote
One way to illustrate the concept might be to consider what many ethics classes do – take an example of an actor, an act and the consequences of the act and evaluate using a number of the various approaches to ethics. While some will involve considering the intention of the actor, others focus on the act, others on the consequences.
You can always make the argument for pheromones that way. However, remember that pheromones are naturally produced, body odor, both the pungent and natural kind are caused by the chemical reactions of natural pheromones in our bodies plus bacteria.
Would you then say, based on that theory, that natural pheromone production would have an ethical issue because by not bathing, you could have caused a headache in a person? Add that to the same argument as making other competitors drop out because you stink so bad. But yet your intention wasn’t that and you just couldn’t bathe.
I know it might sound like a far off argument, but if you really look at it this way, most of the pheromones out there are produced by the body and are just chemically synthesized. We produce enough naturally, just because we shower so often now and are very very hygienic, for the most part, we lose some of those natural pheromones.
I could definitely see the “if you dont do x, person gets harmed” situation being unethical in a utilitarian sense if you knowingly and willingly don’t do x. However if doing x is exorbitantly unfeasible then I would simply say to try to do everything reasonable to mitigate the harm.
Yes there are different “schools of thought” surrounding ethics and morals, google moral absolutism, subjectivism, and the rest of the associated crap on the subject. I took one of those classes a while ago and according to the professor there is no wrong answer yet he gave the lowest class average I’ve seen since vector calculus. It all has to do with the conclusions drawn by the individual and those ideas are going to be different in every single person though a vast majority may share some common ground here and there.
I remember including the natural production in my original incomplete argument… I also likened changing pheromones to changing clothing, and it still stands to reason because wearing a particularly bright and clashing attire can give some folks headaches. Did you intend to do so? Probably not. Is it therefore unethical? Only if you continue to wear that attire around that person knowing what it does. In my opinion!!! If you had no other clothing and had no possible way of getting other clothes, well, now it’s a whole different wildly out there hypothetical. The kind of hypothetical that ethics professors give their students and give poor marks to those who write less than the 5000 word minimum about the topic.
OK I am ready to respond now.
This is my personal opinion so take it as you please. Every study of ethics that I have ever read or come across always dealt with behavior. So how you behave with or without pheromones dictates ethics. Here is the sticky point, society determines what is and what isn’t ethical behavior. What’s ethical today may not be ethical tomorrow. There was a time in our recent past that it was deemed unethical for men and women to dance around on television while thrusting their hips. That was before BET, MTV, and VH1. Ethics will always in the end be a personal issue. Why? Because we all have personal convictions.
Do I have an unfair advantage if I wear pheromones? Absolutely. The guy that has taken a 6 months course on trading options has an unfair advantage on the guy that just entered the stock market. (We won’t even get into regulation here). The guy that is a mPUA has unfair advantages over the guy with social anxiety. Honestly we all have unfair advantages in one area or another because of either natural skills, or lots of freakin hard work. I know about pheromones because I spend hours and hours researching how to improve my social abilities. The only real edge I have is knowledge. I have no problem giving knowledge away… to those that seek it.
JosieWilder brings up some great points!
I have a question…Since when did using a legal means of manipulation to get a potential customer to do what you wanted them to do, buy what you wanted them to buy, or associate your product with a good feeling become an issue of ethics?
Last I checked, brands have been built upon this very thing! Take a very successful fast food chain as an example:
Social manipulation through colors: Red (evokes the urge to buy now), Yellow (evokes good/happy feelings), Orange (evokes a sense of being hungry and combined with red…a strong sense of desire). These three colors are the base of this fast food chain’s brand for a reason. Now, having said this, are you going to buy and eat something just because it is surrounded by red, orange and yellow? NO!!! There is a lot more that go’s into marketing and branding then that!
As I see it, using pheromones in the same way is not only ethical…it is good business!! If I use a pheromone to evoke a sense of happiness in a potential customer and this gives them that last little push to buy my product, great!! In the same way, just a sense of happiness is not going to cause a person who does not want to buy my product, to buy it…it will just make them a little happier, no harm done. So by using pheromones as one weapon in my arsenal that is my marketing strategy, I can effectively sell better to the people that want to buy, or are in the market, but it in no way gives me mind control to make someone do something that they have no desire to do in the first place…
So I ask again:
Where and how does the question of ethics even come up?
If you are just giving it away…I am accepting!!
-Reese