recogt has not indicated how beliefs will be catagorized as good or bad. Possibly these lie beyond the range of this system.
Are people significantly more than the sum of their beliefs? Is the remainder (person minus beliefs) something you can attribute words like "good or bad" to? Does splitting a person from the beliefs they carry make much sense?
Is it worthwhile to kill someone who is about to kill 2 "innocent" people?
How does the bearers of your philosophy, who behave "good", survive in contest with the bearers of the beliefs your philosophy attributes as "evil"?
Can beliefs be divided along a "good"/"evil" axis? Is it decideable if a belief is "good" or "evil"?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ngdawg
To me, these two are somewhat contradictory in that, sometimes, one must be done to ensure survival of the group( how many more would have died during the Holocaust had it not been been for the allies? And, perhaps, had the victims of it fought as warriors, perhaps the devastation would not have been as great)
|
The holocaust was pulled off very slickly.
The rights of the victims of the holocost where not removed all at once, but where eroded.
At what point do you react to your rights being eroded with all out war? When your wealth/power is in danger? When your life is in immediate danger?
The victims of the holocaust didn't know their lives where in immediate danger until after they where powerless.
If the holocaust victims 'should' have attacked their oppressors and tried to weaken them/destroy them, then any weak and identifiable group should react the same way. Who knows when the strong will decide to slaughter the weak? If the weak do not attack now, they could be the victims of another holocaust...
And that path is a scary one.