Poll: Good or Evil?

Recommended Videos

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
I've heard the train scenario before, but it's flawed in that most people just wouldn't think to throw the man off the cliff if they had a week to think of it, someone who'd think of doing that right away in that scenario follows a very twisted view of the greater good. Like Hitler. And what happens if the big man fights you off? Or you mess up the timing or aim? You just killed someone for nothing. And even cars cant stop a train.
 

Blayze

New member
Dec 19, 2007
666
0
0
Surely you wouldn't actually be able to throw a man large enough to stop a train off the cliff.
 

Dectilon

New member
Sep 20, 2007
1,044
0
0
"I strive for personal gain. I feel that if one devotes their life to serving others, that makes them a willing slave. The creed of altruism is one of slavery, but instead of forcing you with a whip, it forces you with threats of eternal damnation or exile."

A Sith! : D

"To me depending on the kindness of others is the worst sin a man can commit."

More so than murder and rape? : P

In a fantasy world I'd probably be the good guy, helping where possible. But in the real world, sure, I think I'd try to do the best for myself and vote forth a government that will make sure my taxes go to making my country a better place to live in for all (rather than trying to do it all myself) : )

"Oh yeah. I chose to fight the drunks in KOTOR 1 on Taris because I didn't like them talking smack."

But... killing someone for talking smack? : / 's a bit strong 'ennit?
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
Sure, but this isn't by magic, like just saying you want everyone to be happy and it happening. You have to convince people to be happy, give them reasons to be happy. What you're capable of doing with constraints of morality will always be less then those without, or with lesser bonds. If you chose the happiness of others option, you're not going to get much use out of this power, although I'm sure you'd find some use for it.

I respect that choice, but I think it would take a willpower most people dont have to do nothing when you have this much power. Let's be honest here. I'm on your side, I just realized I wouldn't be for very long if it actually happened.
 

Melty Blood

New member
Dec 22, 2007
195
0
0
I don't really care for the whole good and evil thing, as it's often just a half assed way for people to justify their actions or beliefs when there isn't any other good basis.

I usually can't stand it when someone I care about is upset, or someoe nearby is upset, and I'd say about myself that I'm very much a soft-hearted person. But honestly, I can't really have much sympathy for people I don't see, or when it seriously interfere's with my own dealings (I'd still feel bad about it). So I don't care about the staving children in Africa, if that makes me a bad person, then I'm a bad person.
 

Sylocat

Sci-Fi & Shakespeare
Nov 13, 2007
2,122
0
0
Fraser.J.A said:
Here are two moral dilemmas:

There's a train with no brakes hurtling down a hill toward five trapped rail workers. You can hit a switch to divert the train onto a new track, but then it will kill one worker trapped on the other fork of the track. Do you hit the switch?

Ok.

Now, there's another train with no brakes hurtling down a hill toward five more trapped rail workers. You're standing on a cliff above the railway line, and the only way you can stop the train is to grab the man standing next to you and throw him in front of the train (he's an extremely heavy man, whose body will stop the train). Do you throw him screaming to his death?

...

If you're like the overwhelming majority of people, you said "Sure, it's for the greater good" to the first question and "Uugh! No way!" to the second. But the outcome is virtually identical. Not throwing the man unwillingly to his death in the second scenario is against the greater good.

I got these scenarios from a really interesting article on the NY Times website. [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazine/13Psychology-t.html?ei=5070&en=d401354908b626b1&ex=1200805200&emc=eta1&pagewanted=all]
For me, the second situation is a moot point... if a man standing next to me weighs enough to stop a runaway train, my shoving him off a cliff is not an option. ^_^;
 

John Galt

New member
Dec 29, 2007
1,345
0
0
What if he shoves you off a cliff just to be mean? All this time spent pondering moral quandries could have been better spent running away from the 4-ton jackass who wants to kill you.
 

Blayze

New member
Dec 19, 2007
666
0
0
"I strive for personal gain. I feel that if one devotes their life to serving others, that makes them a willing slave. The creed of altruism is one of slavery, but instead of forcing you with a whip, it forces you with threats of eternal damnation or exile."
That's the thing, isn't it? I firmly believe that true altruism (Doing good for no reason whatsoever) cannot exist, because there's always the siren call of "If you do this, then you are a good person, and good people get cake at teatime, but only if you keep on being good. If you don't, you're a bad person, and bad people get knifed after supper."

There's always a reason why people do things for others, and it's that reason that keeps them chained to doing more things for others If there were no payoff... think about it.

Besides, I doubt any amount of flesh and bone could possibly stop a train in its tracks. It'd most likely carve straight through his massive corpse.
 

John Galt

New member
Dec 29, 2007
1,345
0
0
Nice post, oddly enough I was thinking about that earlier today. The only reason people work for the good of others is because they feel good or feel they'll get a reward from it. No one does anything without the possibility of reward, be it a chemical rush or the prospect of divine favor.
 

Snowman Drew

New member
Oct 23, 2007
2
0
0
John Galt said:
Nice post, oddly enough I was thinking about that earlier today. The only reason people work for the good of others is because they feel good or feel they'll get a reward from it. No one does anything without the possibility of reward, be it a chemical rush or the prospect of divine favor.
This is EXACTLY what i think. =] If you help your friends when they need help, its either because you will feel bad if you don't or your life wouldn't be quite so nice without them. EVERYTHING we do is selfish.
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
I pity you, Drew. I don't know who this Kate is, and I can't say I want to. Bad luck you do I guess, cause she's a *****.
But in response to your post, I disagree. I think the more you know a person, the more they are part of you I guess. This does hold with helping complete strangers, but helping a freind is like saving a part of you. Like attracts like normally with freinds. Helping someone who is similar to you can be just like helping yourself, providing it isn't something ridiculous like borrowing a tv or something. This also doesn't account for stuff like instinct, like maternal instincts, that dont let you think before you act.
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
Translation? That was on MGG's level.

And allow me to add that I think Judaisism is more likely than Christianity. That was immature.
 

John Galt

New member
Dec 29, 2007
1,345
0
0
wow, we got another child with the grammar gene removed. When will man stop trying to play God with mortal life?
 

Larenxis

New member
Dec 13, 2007
1,648
0
0
Cough. And now back to our regular programming.

The greater good seems obvious. It's good for me, it's good for them. You can dispute how others have used the term 'the greater good' for evil in the past, but this isn't everybody; it's just me.

What sacrifices would I make? Time, effort, and resources. I could put my time and effort into gaining copious amounts of money, but I think it's better to have a hope for a utopia. Even if it never comes, trying is still a beautiful thing.

What sacrifices would others make? A few people would lose money and power.
I'm not a communist, but I think it's unfair to live in the capitalist situation we're in now where people don't have equal opportunity. If you're born into Darfur with AIDS and your parents are murdered, you don't exactly have the ability to make it big on Wall Street. I don't think everyone should have equal amounts of wealth though, because if everyone can, and only one person does, they deserve it.

When it comes to power, I believe in real democracy. I think everyone should be informed, and everyone should have the opportunity to make decisions. Right now I am being taxed without representation (too young to vote) and I don't feel informed about what the government I didn't elect is doing with my money, nevermind feeling like I can't make any difference without changing the whole system. And I'm lucky. I live in what is consistently named the third (or so) best place to live in on Earth.

I'm not sure if I'm going off topic or not, so I'll talk about the 'Fable' thing. I haven't played it, I've only watched a friend play it. She killed people and stole their houses, beat her wife, and kicked chickens. I don't think I'd do that.

Oh and in response to Kate's claim that nobody cares about what's said, that is simply not the case. I enjoy reading all these posts.
 

Blayze

New member
Dec 19, 2007
666
0
0
Heh. It's not as if I don't know that people do things that help others. I just want people to stop claiming that it's selfless. The person who makes the sacrifice is never completely selfless. I mean, if you help somebody, do you feel good about yourself afterwards? That's a nice feeling, isn't it? Hey, here's another person who needs help! Ah, I can almost taste the improved self-esteem already...

About Fable... In a game, there's less people looking over your shoulder and saying "Stop that! Stop murdering him!" You pretty much have more freedom in a game, and your character is generally strong enough to survive all of the retaliation from NPCs. If in Fable, you played as a normal person and not a Hero, if your character did not have the potential to become a combat monster and didn't know magic, and if there was more in the way of retribution for your acts, you'd be a lot more cautious with him.

That's pretty much how it is in life. You do what you can get away with. When the only real outcome of your actions is different loot and alternate scripted NPC reactions, what incentive do you have *not* to do what gets you the best rewards, other than a decision to role-play a certain alignment? It's not as if it matters, does it? After all, it's only a game... You could always just play through again and stay Good.

Sure, you might find the idea of stealing abhorrent now, but what if there were no real repercussions? If all you had to do after killing a few people was wait a minute or two for that single Wanted star to disappear? If you could get double the Experience Points, more money and better loot from a quest, if only you would sell one of your NPC companions into slavery? I mean, it's not as if you *used* that one. It's not as if you *needed* them to complete the game.

When it all comes down to it, people obey the law because they don't want to face the consequences. That's pretty much all it is. You might consider yourself a good person, but if you could get away with something and there wouldn't be any real consequences, chances are you'd do it. Walking into someone's house and opening the chest in the corner, taking all their worldly possessions and valuables just so you can heal yourself by 50 HP the next time you were low on health? That's theft. Then again, it's the owner's fault. Those fantasy types are so trusting, always leaving their doors unlocked. I mean, anybody could walk in!

Slaughtering your way through the wilderness, slaying bears and wolves left and right? That's genocide. But hey, they're only random encounters! Who's keeping track, eh? After all, you need the Experience from their corpses in order to increase your Level high enough to stop the bad guy from destroying the planet, don't you? If you don't stop him, he'll destroy the planet and all of the humans and animals along... with... it. Ah. Oops. You'd save him the bother, though, if it meant you could reach Level 100, though, wouldn't you?

Sure, people like Jack Thompson and that Mass Erect guy whose name escapes me at the moment see the actions that players engage in as proof that they're going to act that way in the real world. They've got the wrong end of the stick entirely. It's not that players *are* going to act that way in real life. No, it's that they are *not* going to act that way in real life, as it's much, much safer to do it in a computer game.

Everybody's capable of it. Everybody would do it if there were no repercussions. It's just who we are. The Law makes it illegal in real life, but anything goes in gaming. I suppose that's one of the reasons why people meta-game RPGs, isn't it?

"What can I do to get the greatest rewards?"
"What problems will I face along the way?"
"If I do this evil act now, can I still earn enough Light Side Points to give me back my Light Side Mastery?"
"Okay, doing this gets me a discount on all of the stores in the game. However, none of the stores will ever have anything useful. Doing this, however, gets me money, more Experience and better loot. Which action do I take? Man, this is a difficult decision."

It's all about what you get in return, from the 'altruist' who wants to be seen as a good person for their deeds to the meta-gamer admiring the new armour he acquired through betrayal.
 

Fire Daemon

Quoth the Daemon
Dec 18, 2007
3,204
0
0
This is an interesting thread, but like I said earlier you don't know what you will do intill you do it as far as "who will you save questions" go.

You can't describe yourself through words on a forum. Only your actions show who you are.

If you were told that you could kill half the world to save the other half and then told that you could part that job onto someone else of your choosing. you would think that saving half the world would be a good thing but maybe it isn't. How many families would be broken, how many people would lose their money and become poor beggars, would you, your family and friends be part that died. Imagine waking up and find that half of everyone was gone. Could you be responsible for that? Would you hand it on to someone else and give them that problem. Or would you rather that no one survived so that the other half don't need to suffer.

I think that this is an interesting question. i was asked it awhile ago and still can't think of an answer for it.

Who is that Kate guy and what was his game? I'm not good following Internet flame wars so can someone please explain.
 

John Galt

New member
Dec 29, 2007
1,345
0
0
I'd take out half the world, who knows? I might get lucky and take out the 'bad' half. Anyways, the way I see the choice is:

a) Kill half the world, avert 'total' disaster, and more or less survive.
b) Let the world perish
c) Hand it off to someone else and risk being in the dead half.

Logically, the best one for me would be "A" I survive and so does half of everyone else. Better than dying in "B" or gambling with my life in "C".
 

Fire Daemon

Quoth the Daemon
Dec 18, 2007
3,204
0
0
John Galt said:
I'd take out half the world, who knows? I might get lucky and take out the 'bad' half. Anyways, the way I see the choice is:

a) Kill half the world, avert 'total' disaster, and more or less survive.
b) Let the world perish
c) Hand it off to someone else and risk being in the dead half.

Logically, the best one for me would be "A" I survive and so does half of everyone else. Better than dying in "B" or gambling with my life in "C".
I never said that you would get to chose who lives and who dies and I never said you get too live. You might end up killing yourself.

personaly i could do it. I couldn't live with myself knowing that I hit the switch or pull the plug or whatever.
 

Easykill

New member
Sep 13, 2007
1,737
0
0
I could do it. What you said about families is probably wrong because it'll probably be in a certain geographic region, killing everyone there. Also, when it comes down to it, losing half our population would actually be a good thing for the species. All it is, is a switch. I could do that. I'd feel guilty the rest of my natural life, but I could do that.