First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
Character and Body
10452 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 11/9/09 , edited 11/9/09
The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?
17888 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 11/9/09 , edited 11/9/09


Now for your question... I have to judge each based on the factors.
If Me or my friend are to be tortured I have to take on the torture over him, why because I have a higher threshold for pain.
If one must kill the other. Than sorry it is only human nature to put one self above another, unless it is part of your blood line. For It is the built in responsibility of the parents to protect and allow ones own offspring to survive in-order to keep the blood line going. Protecting ones child is instinct. same As protecting one self. So if death is the factor, One will choose someone else to die in your place unless it is your child. Because the is nature and instinct in the end trumps everything else. (unless the person is mentally deficient in the brain)
Posted 11/9/09
well it would depend on how old my daughter was and if she was going to die at child birth or not that would probably be the hardest decision in my life that I would ever have to make and it conflicts with my own my own morals as well sadly yes if she was really young and would die i could not stand to lose my daughter it would be to heart breaking and it would tear me up inside but unlike most people I would have a funeral for the unborn child as well go figure
17888 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 11/9/09 , edited 11/9/09

CecilTheDarkKnight_234 wrote:

well it would depend on how old my daughter was and if she was going to die at child birth or not that would probably be the hardest decision in my life that I would ever have to make and it conflicts with my own my own morals as well sadly yes if she was really young and would die i could not stand to lose my daughter it would be to heart breaking and it would tear me up inside but unlike most people I would have a funeral for the unborn child as well go figure



That is why in the past parents would not name there kids till the child was a year old. Do to not getting to connected to a child that may not make it through a harsh winter.
I am still sure it was heart braking for them, but not as bad as if they gave the babe a n
ame and treated it like there child.
Posted 11/9/09

SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?

I choose 3)I am Spartacus.

If you're interested, the Value in Action Institute has extensive research done about character strengths and virtues.
373 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Seoul, South Korea
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.
If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.
Posted 11/9/09

sjp30 wrote:


SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.
If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.

An utilitarian like yourself will never be a martyr of pain and suffering and thus, never a true leader nor hero of the people in times of pain and suffering.
373 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Seoul, South Korea
Offline
Posted 11/9/09 , edited 11/9/09

DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.
If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.

An utilitarian like yourself will never be a martyr of pain and suffering and thus, never a true leader nor hero of the people in times of pain and suffering.


Well its hard to say that some one will never witness pain and suffering.
Life is a pretty random thing. Its almoste imposible what might happen to a person.
And you talk as if you know what a true leader or heroes are. I think leaders and heroes are made because they have a cause they believe in bad enough to put so much effort in what they do, to accomplish even the smallest of things in their life.
There are true leaders and heros every day noone sees who put effort into what they believe in. Little things that people are doing based on what they believe in is not an easy feat. I think to accomplish something in life is very difficult and it takes alot of effoert to accomplish even littel things like improving your grades from a B to a B+. Everyone who accomplishes something for me is a hero who ispires me and a leader I want to follow the foot steps of.
So I think its hard to say some one will mever be a hero or leader of people in times pain and suffering when even a small thing can help a persons life. Noone has to be a hero or leader to help others and I dont think great heroes and leaders are made intentionaly, they just did what they believed was the right thing to do and made it happen.
I'm not sure how my ideals are utilitarianistic, but thats probably my lack of understanding of what I learned at school in history class.
Posted 11/9/09 , edited 11/9/09

sjp30 wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.

If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.

An utilitarian like yourself will never be a martyr of pain and suffering and thus, never a true leader nor hero of the people in times of pain and suffering.


Well its hard to say that some one will never witness pain and suffering.
Life is a pretty random thing. Its almoste imposible what might happen to a person.
And you talk as if you know what a true leader or heroes are. I think leaders and heroes are made because they have a cause they believe in bad enough to put so much effort in what they do, to accomplish even the smallest of things in their life.
There are true leaders and heros every day noone sees who put effort into what they believe in. Little things that people are doing based on what they believe in is not an easy feat. I think to accomplish something in life is very difficult and it takes alot of effoert to accomplish even littel things like improving your grades from a B to a B+. Everyone who accomplishes something for me is a hero who ispires me and a leader I want to follow the foot steps of.
So I think its hard to say some one will mever be a hero or leader of people in times pain and suffering when even a small thing can help a persons life. Noone has to be a hero or leader to help others and I dont think great heroes and leaders are made intentionaly, they just did what they believed was the right thing to do and made it happen.
I'm not sure how my ideals are utilitarianistic, but thats probably my lack of understanding of what I learned at school in history class.

To put it quite simply, an utilitarian is someone who will maximize his own happiness, joyfulness, and pleasures through avoiding and eliminating his own pains, sufferings, and dreads through any means necessary. Kinda like what you were proposing when you denied any responsibility for the consequences of your choices and actions.

Therefore a leader or a hero is not an utilitarian. For no joy-seeker shall be a leader nor a hero of my time, when I need those who can overcome their own pains and sufferings to stand beside me. In that sense I don't need a competitor, a winner, or a conqueror, just as I also don't need a coward, a looser, or a bully. When all I need are true masters of their own domains.
373 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Seoul, South Korea
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.

If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.

An utilitarian like yourself will never be a martyr of pain and suffering and thus, never a true leader nor hero of the people in times of pain and suffering.


Well its hard to say that some one will never witness pain and suffering.
Life is a pretty random thing. Its almoste imposible what might happen to a person.
And you talk as if you know what a true leader or heroes are. I think leaders and heroes are made because they have a cause they believe in bad enough to put so much effort in what they do, to accomplish even the smallest of things in their life.
There are true leaders and heros every day noone sees who put effort into what they believe in. Little things that people are doing based on what they believe in is not an easy feat. I think to accomplish something in life is very difficult and it takes alot of effoert to accomplish even littel things like improving your grades from a B to a B+. Everyone who accomplishes something for me is a hero who ispires me and a leader I want to follow the foot steps of.
So I think its hard to say some one will mever be a hero or leader of people in times pain and suffering when even a small thing can help a persons life. Noone has to be a hero or leader to help others and I dont think great heroes and leaders are made intentionaly, they just did what they believed was the right thing to do and made it happen.
I'm not sure how my ideals are utilitarianistic, but thats probably my lack of understanding of what I learned at school in history class.

To put it quite simply, an utilitarian is someone who will maximize his own happiness, joyfulness, and pleasures through avoiding and eliminating his own pains, sufferings, and dreads through any means necessary. Kinda like what you were proposing when you denied any responsibility for the consequences of your choices and actions.

Therefore a leader or a hero is not an utilitarian. For no joy-seeker shall be a leader nor a hero of my time, when I need those who can overcome their own pains and sufferings to stand beside me. In that sense I don't need a competitor, a winner, or a conqueror, just as I also don't need a coward, a looser, or a bully. When all I need are true masters of their own domains.


I cant agree that what i said first was untilitarianistic.
A choice a person makes is not always for the maximum joy or happiness of one self, but if I have a perpous for life and I want to accomplish it; I would do what ever it takes, even if i am to torture a person for it.
It is self centered, but If I have a cause for my actions, than there is no reason for me to not persue it.
and to deside to torture a man would not be the choice one would make for the maximum joy or happiness. It has to be painfull to have to torchure a person you barly know (I think), I would not forgive myself, but If I had a cause for what I did there is no turning back.
I I have chosen to be the suffurer than I could have tried takeing the torture and risk of losing my life or limbs I may need to live for my cause. Yes the person I have to torture may also have a good cause to try to not go though the torture, but what differents is there betwee me and him? could he have been living for a better cause than me? if thats true than I wish he would never giveup. what I'm saying is when there is ether me or him I would chose me to do what I believe in.

This discussion remindes me of an anime called Code Geass where Luluch (the protagonist) will do anything to make a better world for his sister (Nanaly) to live in. In the end he becomes the most hated vilen to everyone in the world by causing mass mwerder and the use of WMD.

He did not have to be a Hero to live for his cause. I think he is a very sad character who has to carry the berden of a mass merdurer. You can say if he had any heart, but though his actions it caused the death of his sister (Euohemia) who was also his beast friends lover, and even cause the death if his lover's (Shirley) father and herself. He clearly knows the pain and suffering of the people he is creating, yet his beleife gives him strength to keep going and finishes his act as a vilin till the end, and opens a chance for the world to become a better place for his sister and everyone to live in.

Ya this is just an anime where all sorts of stupid things can happen, and it may be stupid of me to use an anime as an example for a reallife discussion, but this anime really questioned me what is good and evil. and if there is god wether god would send him to hell or not..... Some people may think Luluch as an idiot makeing the choices he made, but then can you blame a retarded person for doing his actions. It may be imposible for a person like Luluch to egsist but if there was..... He did not have to be a Hero to feight for what he believed was the right thing to do.

Ovcosre it would have been impossible to judge wether he was a person who had a dream for a better peacful world or just a greedy despot who just wanted to conqure the world. If we wern't watching him in a third person view where would have been no way anyone could have seen him as a good person.
Then that made me think. to see in a third person view is something only god can do (as far as I know) and if god is the only one who can truly judge my actions than there is no reason for me to stop my actions for what I believe in when in the end I will be judged by an absolute force who knows me better then anyone.
That does not mean I will ignore peoples feelings, but It will affect me when I make important desitions in my life.
I think to live life in its fullest is to live for what you truly believ in, for what is important for you.
It is a very self centered consept, but I must stress that this consept does not ignore peoples feelings and I agree we should respect peoples feelings, and personaly it's impossible for me to ignore peoples feelings because I personaly think I have alot of empethy (i think) I shed tears when I see people get tortured or lose a loved one when I watch movies to, but if I had to chose wether to torture or be tortured, I would think of my best interests and follow my belife.
2121 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Usa
Offline
Posted 11/9/09
What you speak is a false premise the soul and the body are one not separate. I wouldn't be able to make the decision of whether to torture another or become the torturer. Don't play the game remember the Joker from the dark-knight ? Where he had set bombs on both ships and told them they can either kill the others or he would blow both ships up joker lost that battle because they figured it out don't play the game. For the sake of answering your question id want my son to be the victim, and id tell my daughter that it is her body thus her choice and not for me to decide. What is truly evil do you know? With every so called act of evil someone does there is a purpose for what they are doing, their feelings, their beliefs. They believe the goals they have are the dreams of others and that everyone will benefit from their actions. So Who are you to call them evil?
2633 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / New York City, NY
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


DomFortress wrote:


sjp30 wrote:


SeraphAlford wrote:

The term soul has been battered around for a long time, but what exactly does it mean? Well, first off we should be aware that the soul is not necessarily a religious ideal. It’s mostly a philosophical concept, but how can it be explained so that the everyday individual can understand? Well, Socrates described the soul as the self. A Catholic encyclopedia defined the soul as the source of all thought. Agnostic physicist Paul Davies used the words ‘soul,’ and ‘sentience,’ interchangeable in his book, “God and the New Physics.”

I’ve chosen the word character, I think it’s apropos. The soul is our character. The term character includes our peculiarity, what makes us uniquely ourselves, and it also encompasses our thought processes. After all, we judge an individual’s character by his choices. Choices are not made without thought. So, for example, you wouldn’t judge somebody’s character for an accident because he didn’t consciously go out to do it. We also tend to see knee jerk reactions as more understandable than premeditated attack.

So, here’s my question for you. Would you rather be wounded in character or body? That seems a bit broad. Let me rephrase the question. Would you rather be a sadistic torturer of martyrs, or a selfless martyr being victimized by a sadistic torturer? Now let’s extend the example from what you would prefer of yourself to what you would prefer of others. What if your son was captured in a war and ordered to torture his fellows or be tortured himself? What would you expect him to do? What would you want him to do? What if your daughter was considering a very late term abortion? Would you want her to suffer the pregnancy, suffer the consequences of her actions, or make the baby suffer so that she does not have to? Is it worse to do evil, or suffer evil?


Weather to do evil or suffer evil.
Well if you look at it your way there is not much you can ask.
the answer is in all of us and weather we chose to do evil or suffer evil its all our choice.
how can there be a right or wrong in that.
My opinion my be self centered, but I think what is important for one self is what one believes in.

If that person believes that doing evil is right or suffering is right than that was that characters choice.
who can blame. If I had the choice to ether torture a person or get tortured I would torture a person.
I would do that because that is what I beleive is the right thing and gives me the better chance of servival, and less pain.
how different can the person I'm torchuring be with me. If i was in his position and he had the choice to torture me or not its all up to what he beleives is the right thing to do. The exact same thing as I would do, but with a different out come where ether one of us us being torchured.

To beginwith we are not capable of jusdging what is good and evil. At least thats what I think the only one who will judg that is by god (I dont believe in a relgion but there is no reason to believe god does not exist), god is the only one that is capable of judging if a person is good or evil from all the minds and perspective in the world so god is the only one who can judge if a person is truly good or evil.

That is why I desided to live by what I truly believe in wether it may harm or help a person, my desition will be made by what I beleive is the right thing to do. Even if I have no choice to do something against my belife or even make a mistake, I will adapt and look for another chance to live by what I beleive in.

As far as you beleive in what you did is right there is no one who can judg that is evil or good, thus wether you torture or get tortured it was your choice and ability god gave us to what I beleive is to live the way you believe is right and in the end God will be the only one who can judge you.

I meight be too young to butt into an adult conversation on weather doing this is better thatn doing that, but I thought I could add my two cents into this topic.

An utilitarian like yourself will never be a martyr of pain and suffering and thus, never a true leader nor hero of the people in times of pain and suffering.


Well its hard to say that some one will never witness pain and suffering.
Life is a pretty random thing. Its almoste imposible what might happen to a person.
And you talk as if you know what a true leader or heroes are. I think leaders and heroes are made because they have a cause they believe in bad enough to put so much effort in what they do, to accomplish even the smallest of things in their life.
There are true leaders and heros every day noone sees who put effort into what they believe in. Little things that people are doing based on what they believe in is not an easy feat. I think to accomplish something in life is very difficult and it takes alot of effoert to accomplish even littel things like improving your grades from a B to a B+. Everyone who accomplishes something for me is a hero who ispires me and a leader I want to follow the foot steps of.
So I think its hard to say some one will mever be a hero or leader of people in times pain and suffering when even a small thing can help a persons life. Noone has to be a hero or leader to help others and I dont think great heroes and leaders are made intentionaly, they just did what they believed was the right thing to do and made it happen.
I'm not sure how my ideals are utilitarianistic, but thats probably my lack of understanding of what I learned at school in history class.

To put it quite simply, an utilitarian is someone who will maximize his own happiness, joyfulness, and pleasures through avoiding and eliminating his own pains, sufferings, and dreads through any means necessary. Kinda like what you were proposing when you denied any responsibility for the consequences of your choices and actions.

Therefore a leader or a hero is not an utilitarian. For no joy-seeker shall be a leader nor a hero of my time, when I need those who can overcome their own pains and sufferings to stand beside me. In that sense I don't need a competitor, a winner, or a conqueror, just as I also don't need a coward, a looser, or a bully. When all I need are true masters of their own domains.


Sounds like you need a Nietzschean.
4302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:



Now for your question... I have to judge each based on the factors.
If Me or my friend are to be tortured I have to take on the torture over him, why because I have a higher threshold for pain.
If one must kill the other. Than sorry it is only human nature to put one self above another, unless it is part of your blood line. For It is the built in responsibility of the parents to protect and allow ones own offspring to survive in-order to keep the blood line going. Protecting ones child is instinct. same As protecting one self. So if death is the factor, One will choose someone else to die in your place unless it is your child. Because the is nature and instinct in the end trumps everything else. (unless the person is mentally deficient in the brain)


then i suppose many hereos would be chracterized as mentally deficient which American Phychology Association has been known to do...not that the morjority of humans are rational ne way. peace over war
17888 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

JJT2 wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:



Now for your question... I have to judge each based on the factors.
If Me or my friend are to be tortured I have to take on the torture over him, why because I have a higher threshold for pain.
If one must kill the other. Than sorry it is only human nature to put one self above another, unless it is part of your blood line. For It is the built in responsibility of the parents to protect and allow ones own offspring to survive in-order to keep the blood line going. Protecting ones child is instinct. same As protecting one self. So if death is the factor, One will choose someone else to die in your place unless it is your child. Because the is nature and instinct in the end trumps everything else. (unless the person is mentally deficient in the brain)


then i suppose many hereos would be chracterized as mentally deficient which American Phychology Association has been known to do...not that the morjority of humans are rational ne way. peace over war


If the hero as you call them was aware that his action would lead to his death, he not save the person most likely. (self preservation would kick in.) If the hero feels he can save the person and have a good chance of surviving than yes they will try to save the person.
A cop will not jump in the middle of a hail of gun fire where there no chance of him making it out alive. Instead he stay back and wait for backup. even if there are victims in the place.

there is a thin line between a hero and a dead guy. (and that is the ability to properly estimate the situation, And come up with the best action for the problem.) (over estimating ones own skills will get you killed not make you a hero.)
(nothing logical or heroic about dieing, Because you did not have the common sense to know better.)
4302 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
forgot where
Offline
Posted 11/9/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


JJT2 wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:



Now for your question... I have to judge each based on the factors.
If Me or my friend are to be tortured I have to take on the torture over him, why because I have a higher threshold for pain.
If one must kill the other. Than sorry it is only human nature to put one self above another, unless it is part of your blood line. For It is the built in responsibility of the parents to protect and allow ones own offspring to survive in-order to keep the blood line going. Protecting ones child is instinct. same As protecting one self. So if death is the factor, One will choose someone else to die in your place unless it is your child. Because the is nature and instinct in the end trumps everything else. (unless the person is mentally deficient in the brain)


then i suppose many hereos would be chracterized as mentally deficient which American Phychology Association has been known to do...not that the morjority of humans are rational ne way. peace over war


If the hero as you call them was aware that his action would lead to his death, he not save the person most likely. (self preservation would kick in.) If the hero feels he can save the person and have a good chance of surviving than yes they will try to save the person.
A cop will not jump in the middle of a hail of gun fire where there no chance of him making it out alive. Instead he stay back and wait for backup. even if there are victims in the place.

there is a thin line between a hero and a dead guy. (and that is the ability to properly estimate the situation, And come up with the best action for the problem.) (over estimating ones own skills will get you killed not make you a hero.)
(nothing logical or heroic about dieing, Because you did not have the common sense to know better.)


yea, but intense emotions like love and hate can make people kill themselves. emotions that rage out of control will make people lose all rational though, logic, and reason. So self pervation instinct cant kick in if its over powered by the instinct of sexuality and aggression.

Thats why people give up thier lives for no apparent reason in suicides, and mass suicides, or they may die for a loved one.
I mean, why else would people jump in front of a train? its emotional stress that overpowers the need to survive. This same stress can be used by heroes. I heard of a soldier who jumped on a granade to save the life of his comrads. He knew he would die...peace over war
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.