thefifthmonarch | (no subject)

Current Mood: curious

(no subject)

Extracurricular Assignment:

You have two options, you can do one or both.

Option 1: Is life predestined or do people have free will. Please cite your reasons, explain them, and go in depth with your argument.

Option 2: Can moral extremes such as "Good" and "Evil" actually exist in the real world. Please cite your reasons, explain them, and go in depth with your argument.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

No, our lives are all predetermined by nerds at computer screens.

Hey, hey, no meta'ing right through this, come on, let's see people have fun with this!

... Option 1, though... No. All of us, ultimately, are bound to the will of another, one way or other.

Yes, the second thing can.

Because I've seen atleast five times this exact scenario happen.

Generic_Monster: I have generic evil motives!

Owlheaded_Loser: HERO HERO HERO

Generic_Monster: I'm defeated by good!

Edited 2009-06-26 09:29 (UTC)

... I'll go with the second question.

I don't believe that there's really such... Extremes as good and evil. Judgments are just that-- judgments. No one can honestly call somerthing good or evil, as their own judgment might also then be skewed by personal beliefs and opinions. If someone can honestly see one thing as "good", another might honestly see it as "evil", and so forth...

For example, someone might try to help others through unconventional ways-- even though it might be seen as "good", many might see the unconventional manner in which he attempts to do his actions as "evil". As a result, there is a disconnect between there being absolute and undeniable "good" or "evil".

However, I do believe that there is a sense of order and chaos. Of benefiting forces to the world, and destructive forces. No one can honestly claim any of it as "good" or "evil", however... Just what harms and what does not. As sometimes... Even "harm" can give way to what could be generally seen as "good", and even inaction or beneficial actions can be seen as "evil", depending on who is judging it.

... I believe I've made my point that due to the disconnect, there really isn't any way for such moral extremes could exist.

I'm going to go with the second...

Now, I don't think this'll be perfect, but I'd have to argue that, one way or another, there can be a clear Good and a clear Evil, though not all things can classify purely as one or the other.

Let's work off of two basic axioms: The Scientific world, and the cold hard magically-reinforced reality you have introduced me to.

In a dominantly scientific universe, where there is no answered faith, one's actions towards society, and other individuals, provide a moral compass. Utilitarianist philosophies dictate that whatever is best for the whole is the "good" thing. Thus, killing someone is evil because it removes people from the society, reducing its ability to act. Helping a homeless person get a job and stop being homeless is clearly good, by allowing him to add more to society one way or another. I can't agree with more extreme utilitarianism, which could be used to justify, for example, deadly game shows on television, since entertainment is a value, but at the least, it can provide some clear "Good" and clear "Evil" deeds, in the overall sense.

Now, let's go to a magical world, where different divine and demonic things exist to muck with reality. Here, Good and Evil can be clearly stronger, as supporting a Good being would, itself, be good, and vice versa (OOC: misspelling intentional). What, however, would define a being as Good or Evil, you ask? Once you're at the top level, and ergo there are only equals and inferiors, at this level, you're essentially interacting much as humans would in a scientific universe - our equals are one another, our inferiors the animals of the world which we have dominated. At that point, we can go back to the utilitarianist view; while there is a twist, in that the lesser beings may be the true 'society' in this instance, depending on the scarcity of top-level beings, these beings' actions can ultimately be classified on similar basis; that is, a genocidal maniac superbeing would clearly, by doing harm to the overall society, be "Evil", while a similar being acting to bring lesser beings a decent afterlife would be "Good".

Second thing.

Probably. I mean, if y'interpret everythin' disgustin' in this world as bein' "evil", an' then accept that it's probably 99% so.

But hey, might just be technicality. I mean, if somethin' is so dominantly one thing, it ain't like th' other extreme could just exist, right?

It could. But for argument's sake, it could exist in a box.

Or you know, magic is just really really advanced physics and science that doesn't fit the current model.

... Shush you.

While that is a possibility, we can still use the overall split... At least, I'm pretty sure there still, logically, has to be such a thing as a highest power level. Just like you don't see Monster Cards going over a base ATK of 10000, there's someone on top, and at that point, ultilitarianism can be said to take over for them.

You know, for a Texan. You're smart, dear.

And the usual ATK limit is more like 5000. But that's rare. The usual cap is 2500~3000.

But still, there is the argument that anything advanced enough can easily be confused for magic by... stupider entities.

Please don't stereotype us as idiots, Noriko-sensei...

Trying to remember which Sci-Fi author was famous for saying that... That part of the course wasn't a strong point for me, I'll admit.

Knew a Texan once. Who was also Osakan. Great girl. Bit of a dull bulb, but an impeccable employee. Paid her well. Friendly. Should give her flowers some day.

Arthur C. Clarke I think. Could be wrong. It was either him or Asimov I think.

It's funny that some people actually believe in the second.

Then sure, why not. But as a result, lot of th' majority 'f what could go an' be considered good an' evil are all just variations of "evil" itself. Vaguely evil, kinda evil, pretty evil, very evil, an' just plain evil. It just all depends on th' person's definition on what's evil.

There's probably only then an actual handful of whatever could go an' be considered absolutely "good". 'f course, they all exist in a box. Damn 'em.

First option. There is no such thing as 'Fate' and 'Destiny'. Those are preconceived notions from ancient times that have lingered today. Everyone has free will, to change their path as they see fit. Those ideas can be shattered, and anyone with a strong eneough will can face what someone else calls 'Fate' and 'Destiny' head-on and win!

...I'd imagine that I should probably steer clear of questions like these, for various reasons.

Though interesting questions none the less... are you planning on doing these on occasion?

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only