This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Unworthy Culture? Destroy Them?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
The reason that Rome was able to rapidly take over the world is because they scattered the men they conqoured. Take the men away from thier women, and ship them all over the empire. Once that was done, they shipped in people of all different areas, and instilled thier 'Roman' culture. They improved the world, no doubt. Where there were warring tribes of people killing and eating eachother, now there were roads, books, education, and economy. Sure, they had to destroy the 'culture' they encountered, and put in thier 'better' one, but did that make it right? If not, was it wrong? Technically, it improved the quality of life. Could we and should we do the same?
Do you want people to hate you now and revere you thousands of years later, like the Romans?
Hmmm... no... neither...
I wasn't saying I advocated this course of military action. The real question here is 'what is right'.
Post by
Laihendi
There is no universal right and wrong. What's right for one person is wrong for someone else, that's why there are disagreements.
Post by
MyTie
Perhaps. But, is anything truely wrong? Or is baby eating not wrong?
Post by
Laihendi
It's wrong to you, it's probably not wrong to the person who does it.
Post by
MyTie
It's wrong to you, it's probably not wrong to the person who does it.
What about to the baby? How did we forget the constant in both equasions?
Post by
Laihendi
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
Post by
Liegelord505
But if we just let the new culture alone, what does that accomplish? Taking a page from Mother Nature's book, if we do not snuff out the inferior culture, how will Human society as a whole evolve? If we keep destroying new cultures, eventually one will arise with beliefs superior to our own and will contribute that to Human society.
For the betterment of Mankind as a whole, I would use the technology to destroy this culture. So when the day comes that a culture who is superior to mine comes, I would welcome it with open arms.
As an example, if you have some sort of growth on your body, not especially malignant, would oyu just leave it their to grow or would you remove it? I would remove it. But, what if that growth carried some special benefit. It could happen. And so I will trim the ones that aren't helpful to clear the way for the helpful ones.
Post by
MyTie
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
I'm glad you agree that abortion is wrong, and society should intervene and stop a woman from getting one.
Post by
Laihendi
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
I'm glad you agree that abortion is wrong, and society should intervene and stop a woman from getting one.
If you've payed any attention to what Laihendi has said in the past, then you would know that Laihendi believes that in many cases adoption is better than abortion, but in certain extreme circumstances (such as if the health of the mother is at risk) abortion is acceptable.
And following the idea that there is no universal right and wrong, your morals aren't correct just because you think they are.
Post by
HoleofArt
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
I'm glad you agree that abortion is wrong, and society should intervene and stop a woman from getting one.
I really hope that was sarcasm.
If the woman really doesn't want the baby, who, to be eligible for abortion, is little more than an over-sized cell thats rapidly growing bigger, it doesn't even have the intelligence to let itself know it is alive, then yes. I see nothing wrong with abortion. The world's overpopulated anyways.
Forcing someone to keep a baby they never wanted is just as wrong as the proclaimed, 'murder' of the baby. Depending on how you see it of course. So I say it should be someone's choice.
To the main point of the thread:
Yes. Remove that which is inferior in order to expand.
Some people just don't deserve to procreate.
Natural Selection, anyone?
Post by
Laihendi
Laihendi would like to point out that he doesn't agree with HoleofArt at all.
Post by
ShadowM
Laihendi would like to point out that he doesn't agree with HoleofArt at all.
I don't agree with him either for that matter.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Nitewalkr
If a society of people does things that are considered 'evil' by our society, is it acceptible for us to stop them?
Example:
If a society of people does things that are considered 'evil' by our society, is it acceptable for us to stop them?
Example:
If a small country in Asia promotes domestic violence, rape, oppression of minorities, forced suicides for population control, and sacrificing babies to their 'god', do we have a right to stop them? In this country, people are dieing of starvation, and random people are beaten mercilessly until they die, on a daily basis. I know this is an extreme example, but let's say it exists. Let's say that it is in their culture and religious beliefs to have this form of society. They have a democratically elected government, and keep electing officials that perpetuate the violence.
If we have the technology to scatter their people, and destroy their culture, giving them a chance to start over, or even, follow our example, should we?
IF NOT, THEN WHAT SHOULD WE DO?
Do not limit your answers to: 'zomg, bad idea'... or 'yea, you shouldn't kill babies'... but actually think about the implications of destroying a culture. Think about what makes us right and them wrong. Think about what defines right and wrong. If you intend on dropping a one line 'yes' or 'no' type response without putting any more thought into it, then don't bother. Go back to recycle bin. Also, try reading all of the replies. The conversation may develop into something very interesting if we allow it to.
If the culture is soo bruital as the second example then you sould stop it. I mean yes I do follow my culture but then again I do have a common sense and we all are well tought by our parents to differenciate between good or bad / good or evil.
Any harmful culture is either to ignore or to act upon.
For example:
Lets say your culture is to slash your back with lashes tied with blades and you do that everyday. This one time one of your humble friends sees you doing it and stop you. that is bad and evil.
-------------
But what if the culture is dying. And people who used to follow the culture now follow something else should you stop it?
Post by
159390
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
260787
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Technically, 'right' and 'wrong' are simply how we view things.
Does that mean that 'right' and 'wrong' are simply opinions? If so, does that mean that no act is truely 'right' or truely 'wrong'. If that is the case, then what is the point of acting? If nothing I do in life is right, why do anything at all?
Post by
L33tsauce
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
I'm glad you agree that abortion is wrong, and society should intervene and stop a woman from getting one.
The problem there, is that it's not a baby in question anymore, it's a fetus. And the fetus does not have the level of developed brain matter necessary to think that it's wrong for him to be killed.
Post by
MyTie
The baby may think it's wrong for him to be eaten, but the person eating him disagrees. That doesn't mean that others aren't allowed to agree with the baby, and intervene.
Oh, you're good.
I'm glad you agree that abortion is wrong, and society should intervene and stop a woman from getting one.
The problem there, is that it's not a baby in question anymore, it's a fetus. And the fetus does not have the level of developed brain matter necessary to think that it's wrong for him to be killed.
Interesting claim. I assume you have the scientific study to back that claim up? Of course you do. Now, if you wouldn't mind linking that, we will all take the point into consideration.
Post by
L33tsauce
Interesting claim. I assume you have the scientific study to back that claim up? Of course you do. Now, if you wouldn't mind linking that, we will all take the point into consideration.
Yeah, the thing is, I really don't care about this subject enough to research. I just wandered in, found a comment susceptible to some logical criticism, and had at it.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.