>>712484448
You can generate infinite discussion over even basic binary moral arguments by having the perpetrator and primary representative of the most scandalous answer in the argument be a cute young girl and the representative of the most pragmatic answer be an archetypically handsome man.

It causes a distinct cognitive dissonance because while the average person is capable of decently abstract thoughts, the average person doesn't exist and is a mathematical abstraction between above and below average people. Below average people are going to be so reliant on appearances to determine what is good or bad they're going pick the most pleasant appearance to them while denigrating the least pleasant appearance which will usually be conveniently the opposite, but they can't if the opposition is still conventionally attractive. So they're stuck trying to make logical arguments, which they can't because they're below average.

The below average people out-populate the above average people, who do actually try to argue one way or another based on the merits of either side, but they're stuck dealing with swarms of below average people who keep saying stupid and incorrect things because they themselves are stupid and incorrect but believe themselves to be smart and correct (At least three people reading this are making such an assumption about their opposition right now), while trying and failing to rely on personal appearance-based arguments and ignoring actual narrative cues - which compels the above average people to correct them.

This means the above average people are being perpetually subjected to Cunningham's Law because packs of below average people who are either attracted to the cute girl or handsome man make the most buffoonish points possible and compel reasonable people to play chess with pigeons who wanna shit on the board.

You can apply this to any situation by the way. Dubiously moral cute girls solved a Superpermutation algorithm (the Haruhi Problem).