The "Greater Good" Dilemma

[Based GAWD]

The greater good concept is a bullshit justification used as a placebo for those currently suffering. Like when Christian slavemasters indoctrinated slaves with their bullshit rhetoric about how they would be rewarded for their suffering in the afterlife

 

[oliverlang]

i don't think "good" or "bad" exists outside of human emotions and fickle concepts. In nature there is no good or bad.

 

[And Step]

i don't think "good" or "bad" exists outside of human emotions and fickle concepts. In nature there is no good or bad.

Rolling my eyes.

 

[The Jackal]

i don't think "good" or "bad" exists outside of human emotions and fickle concepts. In nature there is no good or bad.

This. There is only survival

 

[alissowack]

This. There is only survival

I think that even in survival you want to do what is "good". You don't want to bring a knife to a gun fight...or make sure you have bullets so you won't get killed by the guy with the knife.

 

[ThaChozenWun]

I think that even in survival you want to do what is "good". You don't want to bring a knife to a gun fight...or make sure you have bullets so you won't get killed by the guy with the knife.

Wouldn't bringing a gun to a gun fight be bad though?

That's called survival, not doing good. Doing good would be to stay from the gun fight anyway.

Not sure If I understood the post right or what, but yes, sometimes you have to do something bad to make the future good.

Killing a man is bad, Killing Hitler to keep him from killing millions of others is good.
Slavery happening to create the world view that slavery is bad was a good thing even though I hate to admit it.

But you still have opposition at the same time.

To me Christians going into the crusades and inquisitions to push their religion was awful, to some Christians it was gods will.

 

[And Step]

Not a dilemma. Damn I didn't know how to spell dilemma.

But anyway, If you treat everything like school you will be fine. And try to go to the root of the problem and not the branch. This is why history repeats itself because people concern themselves with the symptoms and not the cause.

Hitler wasn't the problem. What gave rise to hitler? He was symptomatic of something much greater. He wasn't the first and he hasn't been the last.

Case in Point. There is nothing Hitler did, that the Europeans did to the Natives in the Western Hemisphere. And the Founding Fathers did to the Natives in America. Hitler is just the convenient whipping boy.

Greater Good comes out of all things if you learn the lessons that need to be learned and chart a new course so this doesn't happen again.

I love the Human Family. Except for Rick Dees and Ktulu.

 

[ThaChozenWun]

Not a dilemma. Damn I didn't know how to spell dilemma.

But anyway, If you treat everything like school you will be fine. And try to go to the root of the problem and not the branch. This is why history repeats itself because people concern themselves with the symptoms and not the cause.

Hitler wasn't the problem. What gave rise to hitler? He was symptomatic of something much greater. He wasn't the first and he hasn't been the last.

Case in Point. There is nothing Hitler did, that the Europeans did to the Natives in the Western Hemisphere. And the Founding Fathers did to the Natives in America. Hitler is just the convenient whipping boy.

Greater Good comes out of all things if you learn the lessons that need to be learned and chart a new course so this doesn't happen again.

I love the Human Family. Except for Rick Dees and Ktulu.

I agree with you, but to get to the root of the issue you have to get rid of the ones are still watering the seeds. Hitler had to be dealt with.

It's like taking down a drug cartel, if you get to the root or main supplier and stop him, it damages all the followers, but you allow one follower with a working brain to continue, in time he will start it all over.

 

[And Step]

I agree with you, but to get to the root of the issue you have to get rid of the ones are still watering the seeds. Hitler had to be dealt with.

It's like taking down a drug cartel, if you get to the root or main supplier and stop him, it damages all the followers, but you allow one follower with a working brain to continue, in time he will start it all over.

Once you get to the root the tree and branches will die. They can't be sustained because their source is cut off. A drug dealer who loses his connect is useless.

 

[BiblicalAtheist]

I don't really know what is what with all that you ask, but I do feel that when I do good, I feel good.

Look for the good in the bad and the bad in the good.

 

[demandred]

This could be a wack thread and I don't know if everybody thinks of this, but when we think about what's good or goodness, there is the idea that good actions or circumstances yield good results and the greater good is a bunch of good acts and circumstances leading up one ultimate good. But is it fair to say that? Is it right to think that every good gesture is rewarded with goodness in return? What if in achieving the greater good that there are mishaps along the way. What if someone's imprisonment, poverty, or weakness becomes something good in hindsight? No one wants to have to suffer, but is suffering always bad...or for that matter is progress always good?

Deep question....

I think Good / Bad = a Position imo

Assuming the position of consistency in good is much harder than bad because Good = placing another needs higher than your own ... Bad = Placing your needs higher than someone elses

Daily Good is more like climbing mountain vs Bad is like rolling/falling down a mountain... it is much harder to climb and stay, than it is to slip and fall... and climbing and staying requires consistent concentration ... slipping and falling only requires a slight distraction... and the effects is that you hit everyone along the way down and have the potential of pulling others down with you as well in a mass effect....

There is a greater benefit in one who assumes the position of good for society... but there is even better in a society that assumes the position... but whether this is reality is another topic for debate... but while every gesture will not be met with another good gesture... some will be met with a even greater evil... the reward for bearing the evils is definitely large in the end... suffering is the result of going against the wave... but nothing good has ever came from going along with the program...

 

[janklow]

Case in Point. There is nothing Hitler did, that the Europeans did to the Natives in the Western Hemisphere. And the Founding Fathers did to the Natives in America.

actually, Hitler's use of concentration/death camps don't have a parallel in the West. i SUPPOSE the argument for the former would be to compare reservations to concentration camps, although i don't think that's a great comparison (which is not to say reservations were awesome). the latter, though, seems unparalleled.

 

[And Step]

actually, Hitler's use of concentration/death camps don't have a parallel in the West. i SUPPOSE the argument for the former would be to compare reservations to concentration camps, although i don't think that's a great comparison (which is not to say reservations were awesome). the latter, though, seems unparalleled.

Actually, that is not accurate. The First Spanish settlers set up concentration camps for the Natives they had trouble converting to Xtinanity

Japanese, Natives, and Blacks were put in Concentration camps. Prisons and Chain gangs in the Deep South were absolutely concentration camps. Check the History of prisons like Parchman in Louisiana and others like that. They worked men to death and even used to have lynch parties with prisoners. Now of course the West didn't label them concentration camps but they were the same.

Hitler wasn't the first to do what he did, just the most prominent.

A skunk by any other name is still the same...................

Japanese were put in concentration camps during World War II.

 

[janklow]

Hitler wasn't the first to do what he did, just the most prominent.

typically we don't refer to what were used for blacks/Native Americans as "concentration camps" because the term starts later; again, if we're talking about reservations (maybe we're not), there's still a degree of difference. and if Japanese were put into concentration camps during World War II ... that would make Hitler the first of the two to do it.

i suppose i don't count the prisons (no matter how ridiculous bad they were in the south) because there's still a difference between them and the concept of concentration camps; in practice, they may have served in a similar capacity.

this still leaves us with the unanswered question of "can you give me a parallel to the death camps, however?"

 

[And Step]

typically we don't refer to what were used for blacks/Native Americans as "concentration camps" because the term starts later; again, if we're talking about reservations (maybe we're not), there's still a degree of difference. and if Japanese were put into concentration camps during World War II ... that would make Hitler the first of the two to do it.

i suppose i don't count the prisons (no matter how ridiculous bad they were in the south) because there's still a difference between them and the concept of concentration camps; in practice, they may have served in a similar capacity.

this still leaves us with the unanswered question of "can you give me a parallel to the death camps, however?"

If I shit on your hand and call it digital waste placement or I call it shitting on your hand. Doesn't change what it actually is.

Conquistadors death camps. They wiped out the Arawak and Carib Nations. Jamaica is an Arawak word and the Caribbean was named for the Carib tribe. They were worked to death land died from murder, disease, starvation, and malnutrition. Many people survived those 'death camps" in Germany.

But there was no such luck for the Carib and Arawak. They simply don't exist anymore.

 

[janklow]

Doesn't change what it actually is.

except that there's a distinction between "concentration camps" and "death camps." the former being terrible doesn't automatically make them the latter. and i have a theory that as profoundly fucked-up as the Spanish/Portuguese treatment of Native Americans might have been, a pre-Hitler version of "death camps" wasn't their actual goal.

there's also this thing where you're presenting Hitler as just some dude that did the same thing all these other guys did... but come on. if you're comparing, let's say, the Japanese internment camps to the most mild of any of Hitler's camps, i think it's clear why Hitler is considered much, much worse than Roosevelt.