After Dinner Conversation

How would we treat others, if they wore our face? In this work of absurdist philosophical fiction, the narrator walks three blocks each day from her car to her work. However, she has a unique situation whereby those in need “wear her face.” This makes it nearly impossible for her to ignore the plight of the homeless man selling flowers to make extra money, the beggar in front of the coffee shop asking for change, or the woman picking up her belongings in the rain. Ajmal, her coworker, doesn’t share her ability to see his face others, and, like most people, ignores the plight of others around him. He calls the narrator a saint, but she argues otherwise. She argues that, given what she sees, she really has no choice but to help. The story ends with the narrator being locked outside overnight, and another person with a similar skill, finds her and gives her a place to stay for the night.

Do desperate times justify desperate measures, or are some measures always off the table? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Hank is the inheritor of House of Hope, a farm facility where elderly or unwanted pets are shipped to be euthanized. This has become increasingly common because of severe global shortages that have pushed the world into near chaos. Each day, wooden crates arrive with dogs, cats, rabbits, and a menagerie of pets to be euthanized. To simplify the process, the government no longer allows families to drop off pets personally or to be with them as they are euthanized. Furthermore, due to resource scarcity it is against the law for House of Hope to take in, or adopt out, the pets that come in. Hank hates the situation, but justifies his role in it by saying, at least, he treats the animals with dignity in their final moments. Things take a turn for the strange when we learn that the unwanted elderly are also shipped in boxes to House of Hope to be euthanized as well.

Is it possible to share a world changing discovery in an equitable way? If a new Galileo came forward today, would you be on his side? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, the Krish is a newspaper reporter reporting on Dr. Zhang’s alleged new discovery; the instantons and inexpensive transportation of matter to and from anywhere in the universe. NASA declares the invention a hoax, but is proven wrong when Dr. Zhang writes out in the Martian soil, “Believe me now?” Dr. Zhang, however, destroys the research for her work and refuses to tell the world the basis for her invention, fearing it will be shared based on a purely profit-driven motive rather than for the general good. In response, Dr. Zhang is taken into custody by the US government. She is later announced dead, from an apparent suicide.

Is there a difference between the right to end your own life quickly, vs slowly? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Bill has decided it is time for a family intervention. His younger brother Tom gained 100 pounds after his wife died and it is affecting his health. His doctor’s have advised him to lose weight and proscribed him medication he refuses to take. Bill tells his plan to their sister, who opts out of the family intervention, arguing it’s his life, and if anyone should be having an intervention, it should be his daughters. Bill disagrees and, after a fishing trip, confronts Tom about his weight. Tom pushes back, arguing that eating makes him happy, that he doesn’t want to live to become an invalid, and that many cultures view obesity in a positive light. Eventually, Tom agrees he will consider making eating habit changes, but only if Bill and the rest of the family quit pestering him.

Who deserves to live the longest? How do you know if you should give or take extra time from others? In this philosophical short story fiction, Shelia gets a strange letter in the mail on her 69th birthday, along with a pamphlet from a strange company she has never heard of. She ignores the mailer, but a few weeks later, two salesmen arrive at her door. They explain to her that “everyone gets 70 years of life,” on average, but that it’s possible to give, or take, extra life from others. Life can be given, or taken, from those you know, or complete strangers. Perhaps some are more (artists, scientists) or less (criminals, drug addicts) deserving of the life they were naturally given. This is all too much for Shelia, who decides to simply put off the question for another day. Her 70th birthday eventually arrives, and the salesmen are back, asking for her decision. Should she give a few years to a loved one? If she does nothing, they explain to her, the community deficient will be taken from society as a whole. After due consideration, Shelia tears up the contracts, and decides to make no decision at all.

Is it moral to take on debts for the benefit of your unborn child that will carry over to your unborn child after you are dead? What if taking on those debts is the best way to ensure your child has the best chance for a successful life? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, a couple looking to have their first child goes to the medical clinic to discuss the cost of DNA selection packages for their yet-to-be-conceived child. How much do they want to fix the genetic lottery to help their child be smart, athletic, or driven? They have the budget to make minor improvements, but if they are willing to take out a loan, they can do more. The problem is the unpaid debt carries to their unborn child if they die before it is paid in full. In the end, through the high-pressure used-car-salesmanship of the company, they decide to leverage their child’s future and order the “Platinum” package.

What if the Devil were real and you could, and did, kill him? What, does the Devil stand for in society, and what might change about society in the event of his death? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Simon is put on trial for having, literally, killed the devil. He did it through trickery, of course. He told the Devil that he (the Devil) was a cheap peddler of a product, fear. But, because he was immortal, he would never truly understand the product he pushed on others. The Devil asserts he fears nothing and, to prove it, he removes his immortality from his being. Simon kills him. And now Simon is on trial. It is unethical to kill a purely evil thing? And, if the Devil is dead, why are bad things still happening in the world?

Should exceptionally horrible crimes be given exceptional horrible punishments? In this work of philosophical fiction, Arthur Montague wakes just moments before his defense attorney walks into the door to greet him. The defense attorney informs him his trial is about to begin. However, Arthur has no memory of the horrible crimes he’s being accused of committing. In fact, he has no memories at all. During his brief trial, he learns that decades earlier he led a genocidal government. As punishment for leading mass executions, he has been put on trial, hung, and reincarnated, hundreds of times. His punishment, it seems, is to be found guilty and put to death for decades, regardless of his memory (or lack of) of the crimes he previously committed.

How much is a year of your life worth? How much would you sell a year at the end of your life for? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Martha finds herself in need of money. She heard from a friend that LifeCorp will pay $500,000 for a year of the end of your life. She heads in, fills out the forms, and finds out, because of her drinking, smoking, and rudderless lifestyle, her life is only worth $20,000 per year. She sells 18 years of her life, pays off her parent’s medical debt, and goes to get drunk. A few months later, she finds out she is pregnant with Benito’s child. It’s a casual relationship, but he agrees they should both go in to sell a year of their life to help support their new child. Benito’s sale is successful, however, when they run tests on Martha, they determine she doesn’t have a year left to sell.

Are there people who should be erased from existence? Are we all inherently self, rather than collectively, focused on our motivations? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Mr. Shaw’s mother, along with others, was brutally murdered when he was a child. The rapist/killer was caught, tried, and put to death. This caused Mr. Shaw to have a difficult childhood in foster homes. Now, as a married adult, he has gone back to the government and requested a review of the killer’s life for potential erasure from existence. Under this process, it will be as if the killer was never born. It also means anyone he talked to, or any actions he took (both positive and negative) will have never existed. This means, in potentially, Mr. Shaw will have never met his wife, but he wants to move forward anyway. His request for erasure is denied by the government because, it turns out, one of the women the killer raped gives birth to the child who cures cancer. Mr. Shaw doesn’t care but changes his mind when he finds out his daughter would have become sick, were it not for this medical marvel.

Is purposeful ignorance the key to a happy life? Should you choose to believe in free will to give your life meaning? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, a depressed philosophy professor is a deep believer in the lack of free will. Everything from his job to his divorce, to his depression, had to happen exactly as it did. Eventually, his drinking catches up to him and he is put into a recovery hospital. It’s a long, hard road to recovery but he begins to wonder if the false belief in free will is the key to living a happy and successful life. Months later he is released from the hospital, moves to the Dominican Republic, and goes back to drinking and enjoying retirement alone.

What obligations do a divorced couple have to each other? Is there an obligation to return phone calls, or check in on an ex’s welfare? In this philosophical short story fiction, the narrator and Dawn have recently gone through a divorce. They were childhood friends, so they have known each other forever and were married for seven years. However, Dawn refuses to pick up the phone and refuses to return the narrator’s phone calls. He continues calling to “check-in” over a period of years with no response. He reaches out to Dawn’s parents to make sure she is okay. She never responds and, in fact, moves to another city. Eventually, the narrator hears she has committed suicide.

Should we be held accountable for what we imagine, but choose not to actually do? Does wrong thought always lead to wrong action? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, scientists have discovered a way to record dreams and make them available for playback. This quickly gives rise to the bootleg sale of horrible and wonderful dreams to a general public interested in ever-more spectacle. It also creates a market for buying and watching the dreams of celebrities. Finally, it brings about the government subpoenaing dreams to use as evidence in trials and, later, in helping it discover crimes that have not but might, happen in the future.

Should the past be forgotten? Does it help society, and the community, to let the past go? How can we learn from the past while simultaneously letting go of it? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, a young boy has been put in charge of the machine that stores the exact collective memories of his grandmother (“Gromma”) and the community at large. His job is made more difficult because the machine is old, falling apartment, and a fire killed the previous caretaker long before his training was complete. As the story closes the boy finds out the previous fire was caused by a community member who believes the community can only move forward by destroying the machine and allowing the memories of the past to naturally fade into obscurity.