Silk Road forums
Discussion => Off topic => Topic started by: tedrux on February 25, 2013, 08:04 am
-
I am passing time as my current plans are on hold so I thought I'd open this up for discussion; avoiding anything specific about the things I connect with my judgement of this particular issue I'd like to see what sort of conversation can be started.
Personally I feel that if a man can have a reason to live then there can be a lack thereof. I think that sometimes peoples existence causes more pain then joy and that for those people it is possible that not even hedonism may apply as a reason to continue. The ideals of social darwinism , while as a younger person having had it cause me great contempt, have a lot of sense to them. In the movie 'Mad World' it is illistrated to a limited extent that social conditioning combined with natural predispositions can put one in a downward spiral that encourages them to intentionally agitate the issue as a way of coping with it. While some are happy with nothing and others miserable with everything they ever aspired to the great mean of people usually are some where in the middle of thriving , bleeding, sweating and persevering whilst accepting different shades a negative world view and personal suffering. I would also like to pose the question if a persons self view is or aught to be more important in this matter then the effect they have upon others and whether or not one major sin against an individual can /should be enough to forfeit their right to life even in contrast to how much value they might have to others (IE. a fire fighter rapes a 12 year old but has saved countless lives and would otherwise continue to do so- is his soul worthy of being in our ideal world?)
-
I know this makes me sound like a psychopath, but I've never understood morality. It all looks so completely arbitrary to me. Now understand something, please: I feel terrible if I hurt someone's feelings. It's very unpleasant for me, and I do not want anyone to suffer. I actively try and stop it. But logically, morality is completely arbitrary and I've never understood it.
If you value saving lives and you consider fetuses alive, then you consider abortion wrong. Sure, given the premises it's logical and the person's right. Disagree with the premises or have different priorities, and your morality is going to be totally different. But they're both moral people. So how the fuck is anything good or bad? It doesn't make sense to me. Personally I think that if the fireman would continue to save lives and do more good than he does harm... he should be given whatever help is available for his particular problems, and allowed to continue helping people. And be reminded frequently that his predilections are not something that can be accepted, and he really needs to stop soon.
Greater good is served that way. The suffering he causes is less than the joy he brings, and as long as that remains true, locking him up serves the greater ill -- not the greater good. I don't think many people would agree though, which is fine: again, it's really just a matter of priorities.