I think that the phrase "for the greater good" is overreacted on. Just because that phrase is associated negatively within our pop culture - which is really where its only said - doesn't mean its a bad term for real world application at all. Sometimes decisions have to be made that may save more lives.
Is "The greater good" ever a good excuse?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
But the Joker DIDN'T use only fear to take over. He used a hell of a lot of good old fashioned VIOLENCE. And he wasn't very discriminating between the people who succumb to fear and those who don't. It AMUSES him to see people destroy themselves out of fear. But he's got a back up plan, and he's entirely prepared to destroy them either way by use of good old fashioned violence.
As Alfred implied, The Joker wants to watch the world burn. It makes for a better punchline if the world destroys itself out of fear. But the Joker is perfectly contently to simply blow everyone right the **** up.
You don't deal with that kind of person by refusing to take action. You deal with that kind of person by doing what Batman did: beating him up and then throwing him off of a roof.
But the Joker DIDN'T use only fear to take over. He used a hell of a lot of good old fashioned VIOLENCE. And he wasn't very discriminating between the people who succumb to fear and those who don't. It AMUSES him to see people destroy themselves out of fear. But he's got a back up plan, and he's entirely prepared to destroy them either way by use of good old fashioned violence.
As Alfred implied, The Joker wants to watch the world burn. It makes for a better punchline if the world destroys itself out of fear. But the Joker is perfectly contently to simply blow everyone right the **** up.
You don't deal with that kind of person by refusing to take action. You deal with that kind of person by doing what Batman did: beating him up and then throwing him off of a roof.
MrGeezer
Which leads me to my next point... Which is why he had set BOTH to blow up regardless. But the point of The Dark Knight was what Batman told the Joker something like "you thought the world was as sick and is scarred to die like you are, but obviously, they arent".
If you would kill other people just to save more on what you "think" would happen, then like Beast said to the aliens in the x-men cartoon, "that is barbarous". My point is that we try our best to do what is always right, not what we think in the end might come out as right after we do a bunch of foul stuff to get there.peaceoutmedusa
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"]If you would kill other people just to save more on what you "think" would happen, then like Beast said to the aliens in the x-men cartoon, "that is barbarous". My point is that we try our best to do what is always right, not what we think in the end might come out as right after we do a bunch of foul stuff to get there.MrGeezer
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
1. You cant predict without a doubt that more people will die.
2.EVEN if you did,how are you going to tell a person that it is their time to go (playing God), when if you let them lived, they mightve been a survivor???
Once again, I dont do God's job because I dont have the credentials to do so.
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"]If you would kill other people just to save more on what you "think" would happen, then like Beast said to the aliens in the x-men cartoon, "that is barbarous". My point is that we try our best to do what is always right, not what we think in the end might come out as right after we do a bunch of foul stuff to get there.peaceoutmedusa
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
1. You cant predict without a doubt that more people will die.
2.EVEN if you did,how are you going to tell a person that it is their time to go (playing God), when if you let them lived, they mightve been a survivor???
Once again, I dont do God's job because I dont have the credentials to do so.
Which was MrGeezer's point all along: we can't completely and accurately foresee the outcome of our actions because we are not god, so all we can do is take what we perceive to be the best course of action based on the available information. Even if when all is said and done it turns out we were wrong, we still did the best we could, because that's all we, as flawed human beings, can do.
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"]If you would kill other people just to save more on what you "think" would happen, then like Beast said to the aliens in the x-men cartoon, "that is barbarous". My point is that we try our best to do what is always right, not what we think in the end might come out as right after we do a bunch of foul stuff to get there.peaceoutmedusa
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
1. You cant predict without a doubt that more people will die.
2.EVEN if you did,how are you going to tell a person that it is their time to go (playing God), when if you let them lived, they mightve been a survivor???
Once again, I dont do God's job because I dont have the credentials to do so.
1) You can't predict ANYTHING without a doubt. So hell, let's all just take the easy way out and stop making any difficult decisions.
2) Don't pull that guilt trip. If the USA hadn't decided to nuke the hell out of Japan, how would the government explain that course of action to the families of the American soldiers and Japanese civilians who died because the USA didn't have the balls to drop the bombs?
I'm not even saying that those bombings were the "right" course of action. But if they weren't done, we'd have the same result. A hell of a lot of innocent people dead, with somebody carrying the burden of those deaths due to his decision to NOT authorize the bombings. Inaction doesn't absolve one of guilt, so don't even play the guilt card. ALL you can do is make the best choice based on the available information. You can sit on your ass and do NOTHING confident that God will make everything work out. But what about when God DOESN'T make everything work out. Then you're left there sitting in guilt knowing that YOU could have made everything work out if only you had the stones to make a hard decision.
And again, doing noting is doing something. If someone dies because you refused to kill someone else, then you've still gotta answer to SOMEONE for the deaths caused by your inaction. Sitting on your ass and waiting for God to resolve everything doesn't absolve you of the guilt for people's deaths. Not in the least.
[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"]
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
1. You cant predict without a doubt that more people will die.
2.EVEN if you did,how are you going to tell a person that it is their time to go (playing God), when if you let them lived, they mightve been a survivor???
Once again, I dont do God's job because I dont have the credentials to do so.
1) You can't predict ANYTHING without a doubt. So hell, let's all just take the easy way out and stop making any difficult decisions.
2) Don't pull that guilt trip. If the USA hadn't decided to nuke the hell out of Japan, how would the government explain that course of action to the families of the American soldiers and Japanese civilians who died because the USA didn't have the balls to drop the bombs?
I'm not even saying that those bombings were the "right" course of action. But if they weren't done, we'd have the same result. A hell of a lot of innocent people dead, with somebody carrying the burden of those deaths due to his decision to NOT authorize the bombings. Inaction doesn't absolve one of guilt, so don't even play the guilt card. ALL you can do is make the best choice based on the available information. You can sit on your ass and do NOTHING confident that God will make everything work out. But what about when God DOESN'T make everything work out. Then you're left there sitting in guilt knowing that YOU could have made everything work out if only you had the stones to make a hard decision.
And again, doing noting is doing something. If someone dies because you refused to kill someone else, then you've still gotta answer to SOMEONE for the deaths caused by your inaction. Sitting on your ass and waiting for God to resolve everything doesn't absolve you of the guilt for people's deaths. Not in the least.
Your attitude about dropping a bomb over something that really wasnt as drastic as people make it out to be is ridiculous. Point blank, we had no business of killing over 50,000 civilians about something that had a good chance of not happening (despite what you believed about it). It was our stupidity as if we owned the world and that we could do whatever the hell we wanted was the reason why the atomic bomb happened. A mass murder of innocent civilians is NEVER the answer, especially when it is because we were afraid of getting hurt. Kill or be killed goes out the friggin window when someone decides to do that.Sometimes decisions have to be made that may save more lives.honkyjoeBut is that the case? The very heart of the question is whether it is morally permissible to sacrifice others. Kant would say absolutely not. Go read the 'Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals' for a more comprehensive look at his ethical philosophy. It's a scary thought to think that the ends can justify the means.
[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"]
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"]
You mean as opposed to sitting on your ass and letting MORE people die when you could have stopped it?
I think what you're failing to realize is that inaction IS ACTION. Deciding to NOT act, is a deliberate action. And if that inaction results in a greater loss of life, then it's hard to say that you made the best choice, when your decision to sit on your ass ended up with a lot more people dead. You could have stopped that stuff, so why did you sit around on your ass refusing to help anyone?
1. You cant predict without a doubt that more people will die.
2.EVEN if you did,how are you going to tell a person that it is their time to go (playing God), when if you let them lived, they mightve been a survivor???
Once again, I dont do God's job because I dont have the credentials to do so.
1) You can't predict ANYTHING without a doubt. So hell, let's all just take the easy way out and stop making any difficult decisions.
2) Don't pull that guilt trip. If the USA hadn't decided to nuke the hell out of Japan, how would the government explain that course of action to the families of the American soldiers and Japanese civilians who died because the USA didn't have the balls to drop the bombs?
I'm not even saying that those bombings were the "right" course of action. But if they weren't done, we'd have the same result. A hell of a lot of innocent people dead, with somebody carrying the burden of those deaths due to his decision to NOT authorize the bombings. Inaction doesn't absolve one of guilt, so don't even play the guilt card. ALL you can do is make the best choice based on the available information. You can sit on your ass and do NOTHING confident that God will make everything work out. But what about when God DOESN'T make everything work out. Then you're left there sitting in guilt knowing that YOU could have made everything work out if only you had the stones to make a hard decision.
And again, doing noting is doing something. If someone dies because you refused to kill someone else, then you've still gotta answer to SOMEONE for the deaths caused by your inaction. Sitting on your ass and waiting for God to resolve everything doesn't absolve you of the guilt for people's deaths. Not in the least.
Your attitude about dropping a bomb over something that really wasnt as drastic as people make it out to be is ridiculous. Point blank, we had no business of killing over 50,000 civilians about something that had a good chance of not happening (despite what you believed about it). It was our stupidity as if we owned the world and that we could do whatever the hell we wanted was the reason why the atomic bomb happened. A mass murder of innocent civilians is NEVER the answer, especially when it is because we were afraid of getting hurt. Kill or be killed goes out the friggin window when someone decides to do that.[QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"] Your attitude about dropping a bomb over something that really wasnt as drastic as people make it out to be is ridiculous. Point blank, we had no business of killing over 50,000 civilians about something that had a good chance of not happening (despite what you believed about it). It was our stupidity as if we owned the world and that we could do whatever the hell we wanted was the reason why the atomic bomb happened. A mass murder of innocent civilians is NEVER the answer, especially when it is because we were afraid of getting hurt. Kill or be killed goes out the friggin window when someone decides to do that.MrGeezerGreat, you can argue that it was a bad decision until the cows come home. But it was BELIEVED to be the "best" course of action. It is widely believed that if it hadn't been done, that far more innocent Japanese civilians would have died during an invasion. Are YOU the one who has to explain to thousands of Japanese civilians why their families were killed during an invasion, when the whole matter could have been resolved by the atomic bombings? You're not the one who had to make the decisions, and you're not the one who has to deal with the consequences. So it's easy as hell for you and I to sit here and judge this stuff in hindsight. But right or wrong, it was absolutely done largely to save lives. That doesn't mean that people don't make mistakes, though. It would have also been a mistake for the USA to sit on their asses and wait for God to end the war. An invasion??? But how can you say this when it never happened. Cant you get this through your head. YOU DONT KILL 50,000 PEOPLE OVER SOMETHING THAT MIGHT NOT EVEN HAPPEN. You try to prevent it, not help it, you have become the enemy once you do that. And no, we werent thinking about an invasion, we wanted to end it then and there, so that we wouldnt have to think about it at all anymore. America has blood on its hands for doing that. If that were to happen in Amer.... Hold up, I forgot, nothing EVER applies to us because we are so self centered in what we want, we say screw everybody else.
[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="peaceoutmedusa"] Your attitude about dropping a bomb over something that really wasnt as drastic as people make it out to be is ridiculous. Point blank, we had no business of killing over 50,000 civilians about something that had a good chance of not happening (despite what you believed about it). It was our stupidity as if we owned the world and that we could do whatever the hell we wanted was the reason why the atomic bomb happened. A mass murder of innocent civilians is NEVER the answer, especially when it is because we were afraid of getting hurt. Kill or be killed goes out the friggin window when someone decides to do that.peaceoutmedusaGreat, you can argue that it was a bad decision until the cows come home. But it was BELIEVED to be the "best" course of action. It is widely believed that if it hadn't been done, that far more innocent Japanese civilians would have died during an invasion. Are YOU the one who has to explain to thousands of Japanese civilians why their families were killed during an invasion, when the whole matter could have been resolved by the atomic bombings? You're not the one who had to make the decisions, and you're not the one who has to deal with the consequences. So it's easy as hell for you and I to sit here and judge this stuff in hindsight. But right or wrong, it was absolutely done largely to save lives. That doesn't mean that people don't make mistakes, though. It would have also been a mistake for the USA to sit on their asses and wait for God to end the war. An invasion??? But how can you say this when it never happened. Cant you get this through your head. YOU DONT KILL 50,000 PEOPLE OVER SOMETHING THAT MIGHT NOT EVEN HAPPEN. You try to prevent it, not help it, you have become the enemy once you do that. And no, we werent thinking about an invasion, we wanted to end it then and there, so that we wouldnt have to think about it at all anymore. America has blood on its hands for doing that. If that were to happen in Amer.... Hold up, I forgot, nothing EVER applies to us because we are so self centered in what we want, we say screw everybody else. My post explains this perfectly -- The self centered nature of specific culture groups.
We dropped the bomb.. to ultimately tell whether or not is the right choice.. is an impossibility because we don't have knowledge of the other possible out comes. You can personaly think it was a bad idea.. and somebody can think it was necessary.. either way their is proof neither.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment