Forums

Shafts of Imagination

Quick find code: 49-50-608-60677877

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Agreed. Put that way, it is creepy. =p

Well that would make you a pure utilitarian, lol.

There are many deep questions involved in making decisions like that. And many different scenarios to play out.

Honestly, I hope you're never in the place of that Mayor.

Personally, I wouldn't be able to do what he does in the story - because I believe in personal inalienable rights, as they are explained in the Bill of Rights, and the United States constitution.

As such, I am a mild utilitarian. I think that we should do our best to improve happiness throughout the world, but without sacrificing the foundational principles which in the end keep society from falling so far from the individual that in the end no individual is happy.

10-Apr-2010 01:11:40

Eri Vi
Jun Member 2010

Eri Vi

Posts: 965 Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Hah, well there's your problem. I'm not from the US, therefore I can lock as many people away as I want! Hm...

Your 'mild utilitarian' view definitely embodies what we should aim to be. But if given the option so solve the GFC and global warming, to stop all wars and end the energy and fuel crisis; to end all racial and gender related issues and put a stop to poverty and over-population. At the cost of, say, China; would you do it? By your views you wouldn't. But the more I think about it... Solve all the problems in the world by sacrificing 1/3 of our population, a number that we could reproduce in a matter of years if we really tried ( ;) )

It's a hard one, and even if people do agree that it could work; I doubt many people could actually make the call.

Ps. Don't go thinking im some psycho, I'm just stating it as an idea :P

10-Apr-2010 01:43:27

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
You know, you should write an epic about something of that sort.

It would be like taking my story up a notch - a global queen sacrifice (if you play chess you might know what I mean).

Personally, I wouldn't do that. But there are many people who would.

On the other hand, if a person offered their life for the global good, I wouldn't stop them. In fact, I think that given the choice, I would offer my life if it meant doing all the things you mentioned above.

But I believe it is my right to sacrifice myself, while it isn't my right to make somebody else do so.

10-Apr-2010 01:53:00

Eri Vi
Jun Member 2010

Eri Vi

Posts: 965 Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Can't say I know what a 'global queen sacrifice' is exactly, but I think I get the idea.
Yea, it would make a good story... It would have to be quite long, and the longest story I've written is only about five pages; and that's the expansion on Jasmine.

I would sacrifice myself too, if I didn't still firmly believe the universe revolves around me. So killing myself would bring the end of time; so, being the good Samaritan that I am, I'll keep myself alive. ;)

You're definitely right; it's not your right to sacrifice someone else. But you must also think that making that sacrifice would bring peace and end all other unnecessary sacrifices. It’s not something you want to be faced with, nor will you ever be. But if someone else had it in their power to do so; would you want them to?

10-Apr-2010 02:05:43 - Last edited on 10-Apr-2010 02:21:12 by Eri Vi

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
I think you could write something longer if you gave yourself the time. It just takes a while.

As for whether or not I would want somebody else to do it if they had the power, my answer is still no.

I believe that if we give up our morals and our principles in order to attain peace, all we'll have done is left ourselves nothing to fight for.

Consider this, over the years of history, man has started and run many different kinds of government. One of these kinds of government is called communism. It springs forth from the same utilitarian viewpoints that my story questions.

Where communism fails is that it does exactly what the Mayor in my story did - except on a larger scale. He sacrificed a childs individual rights, communism sacrifices every individuals rights (the political leap from one to the other is surprisingly small, I might add).

What always happens in communism is that the 'happiness of the many comes before the happiness of the one'. But eventually, if you sacrifice the 'happiness of the one' enough, it effects the many in a very profound level.

Crowd psychology is a very hard thing to predict, but it has been proven repeatedly that if you subject a certain percentage of a group of people (even on a national scale)to specific negative scenario's (taking away their rights and sending them into a frozen northland like russia did in WWII for instance) the group will respond in either depression or outrage.

This is because people realize they aren't safe from the same predicament as their fellows - and fear persuades them to action.

Not to mention the economic strain which is caused by communism. My position thus is that Utilitarianism can only go so far before it becomes a terror to the populace of any nation - or the world. All because it sacrifices the principles that found society in the first place.

10-Apr-2010 02:30:54

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
For instance: When you see somebody being murdered, or mugged, is it your instinct to help them? Or is it your instinct to run and get help?

The majority of people would say yes.
But what if the person being murdered is a child mole(c)ster? What if the person being robbed is going to use the money he has to buy a gun and shoot up a school?

You can't know these things - the strict utilitarian would say that if this was the case, the murder would be the right thing, because that child mole(c)ster is likely to repeat his past crimes - thus it would be better for the many if he is dead.

The strict utilitarian would say that the man be robbed should be robbed, so that he cannot afford the gun to shoot up the school.

But does this mean that murder is okay, as long as you don't murder good people? Or robbery is okay, as long as you don't steal from the kind?

Well, the issue is that men are not perfect judges of character - and governments are far worse than men at this.
A man cannot look at another man and instantly know he is a future murderer or thief or tyrant (and a government certainly cant).

And so where do we get off deciding whether to help the man or not? How should we respond?

This is an exceptionally deep question about justice. Personally, I think that because there are so very many unpredictable variables, we have to make sure that we help any person in need.

Yes, we aim to bring happiness to 'the many'. But I believe we have respect every persons rights as if they WERE 'the many', because in the end - they are.

10-Apr-2010 02:38:17

Eri Vi
Jun Member 2010

Eri Vi

Posts: 965 Gold Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Wow, you're not a psychologist by any chance?

Yea, in those scenarios it makes sense to save them; as you can have no idea who or what they are.

But when given an option after someone has explained to you all possible outcomes from your choice, it just makes it a whole lot harder. No one can blame you for saving a murderer, even if they end up massacring a whole lot of people, if you did*’t know it was going to happen. But if you knew what they were going to do and you still let them go, I know I would feel worse about having had the chance to stop a massacre and not taking it.

Anyway, I'll stop spamming your thread with all this; got to go out. Cya :)


EDIT: Somehow I missed your entire first post.
You say that you have to give up your morals and principles in order to make such a choice, but can that not be your own sacrifice? Or do you feel that by being the survivors all people would feel they have given up their morals?

Unlike a government this wouldn't be a presiding power, just a one off; but I agree, the fear that it might happen again would still remain.

10-Apr-2010 03:00:49 - Last edited on 10-Apr-2010 03:09:34 by Eri Vi

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
No, I'm not a psychologist, but I have put a lot of thought and research into this topic, and many others that interest me.

You're correct, it would be a lot harder to allow yourself to let a murderer go if you knew he was a murderer.
But would it still be right, to kill a man before he commits any crime?

The law would say that it isn't right, and likely you would go to jail for murder yourself, unless you could produce some evidence that he was going to kill somebody - then you might get off if you're lucky.

But most people would agree that killing a murderer to save a lot of 'innocents' would be the right thing to do.

Yet the scenario doesn't cover all the specifics. Are these people 'innocents'? Or are they murderers themselves, or future tyrants, even?

My perspective says just that: We can't play God. Yes, I would probably kill a murderer before I let him kill a bunch of 'innocents' or even people that I don't know anything about - but I wouldn't do it for utilitarianism.

I think it would be wrong to let him kill them. I also think it would be wrong to kill him to stop him from killing them, but given the choice I think that would be the 'lesser evil'.

Either way, we spin back around to morals.

The scenario in the story is different though. The child is innocent. And the mayor, atleast, has to sacrifice part of his 'morals' in order to allow himself to put the child through torment in order to make the people in his city more comfortable.

One might argue that the Mayor did the right thing for the greater good - if the scenario was closed, that might be the case. But you should consider the future outcome of choices like this.

I would suggest you read my story "The Future" - this is what I think comes from choices like that in the end (history speaks for itself). Thus his choice would be good for a closed scenario, but completely horrid if it was done in an open scenario, like real life.

10-Apr-2010 03:43:37

Logan Shafts
Dec Member 2023

Logan Shafts

Posts: 3,211 Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Also, you're not spamming my thread - if anything, I am. Lol.

But this discussion revolves around my story, so it is on topic and thus not spam.

I enjoy conversations of this kind - they're inspiring, and they make me think.

Have a nice night, I hope to hear from you later. ^^

10-Apr-2010 03:45:06

Quick find code: 49-50-608-60677877 Back to Top