 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
I don't have the answers, since I don't know, but my thinking is that the answer in this case is yes.
It makes me wonder, Do you think people should be forced into situations for their own good in order to make them more powerful?
I ask this question because number 2 leaves that option.
If a lie, threat, or even a relatively harmless act of violence is willfully perpetrated by an individual upon another individual or upon more than one other individual so as to save the target of the lie, threat, or violence from certain, torturous, and horrible death, then that can be exemplified precisely that way in reality or in theory.
Now take that example of how a lie, or a threat, or violence, is used that way, and compare it to another example of the same thing.
Now see all those examples of those lies, threats, and all those examples of relatively harmless violence as a competition to see, by some relative measure, which was the least harmful, and which example resulted in the actual reaching of the goal to save human beings from the most certain torturous and horrible death.
Now take the one exemplary example of all those examples that stands out as the least harmful willfully employed example done by someone to cause the result of the greatest good, and there, then, is an example to be compared with the opposite, or the counterfeit, good use of tools.
The lie does not do it.
The threat does not do it.
The violent act does not do it.
A willful person commits a crime.
What is the routine tools used by criminals?
1.
Lies
2.
Threats
3.
Violence
Are there any other tools used by criminals?
Who blames the lie?
Who blames the threat?
Who blames the violence?
How is any of those human actions among humans measured as being either good or bad for one at the hands (and mind) of the other, and is the measure accurate?
A good person will tend to ask, honestly, if their thoughts and actions cause injury to another person, and a good person will tend to trust that the answer is true, and then a good person would, it seems to me, stop repeating the thoughts and actions that harm someone else, or my question is: Why ask that question if not to help the victims of injury avoid further injury?
The other angle I immediately begin thinking about once I read your generous question had to do with the degree at which the transfers of power flow from one person to another person.
That sets me off on the competitive scale building of examples of those degrees at which power flows from one person to another person.
I do that, as a routine, so as to get a larger pictures of each example of interaction among people.
A petty criminal who seeks to gain at the expense of someone else, by lying, by threatening, and by petty examples of violence, for example, can be compared to the examples provided by Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, Pol Pot, and the people who payed them to get started on their paths of crime made legal.
When does crime cease to be of any significance in our human existence?
I think a good way to find out is to stop paying the worst criminals the most power.