Some thoughts...sylvia_roseOctober 15 2007, 14:21:50 UTC
A few nights ago, I was talking to you via IM about a somewhat similar topic: do people deserve to be treated certain ways as human beings? Though I never specifically mentioned being ripped off it falls I think under the category of "being used" quite nicely. And is it right to talk about other people behind their back? Do people deserve better than being gossiped about or being used as "machinery to be tweaked"? It's funny to hear you talk about that because your answer to me seemed to say, "Well, who's to say what one human being deserves at all, and should we even care about it at all?" It made me rather frustrated seeing that you seemed to have no cares about whether one person has been treated rather unfairly, saying we cannot judge what fairness is and therefore shouldn't really worry about it.
But here, it sounds like you're starting to rethink it at least. Is it morally acceptable for people to use other people (by overcharging them or gossiping about them or using them in various other ways)? Most people would say no. However, what is morality? What standard do we use to judge what is wright and wrong? My business teacher says that it's not wrong to ask the rich for a higher price because they can pay more, and if you are charging more to the poor for something and they're willing to pay it, that's their own stupidity. Capitalizing on others is how the world goes round. Who's right?
You're not going to be able to answer questions like this, Cory, unless you sudenly discover some sort of moral standard by which to hold people up against. And when you do find one, who's to say that it's right? Who's to say that your moral code is more right than my business teacher's moral code?
On that note, in answer to your question, I will base my answer off of the only moral code I know of tha has SOME authority: God's moral code. Compared to God's moral code, none of what you mentioned is right under ANY circumstances. Gossip is especially not to be dismissed as just a means of pointing out negatives among the positives. Gossip is done purely to bring someone down and inflate yourself, purely for selfish reasons. If ANYTHING is done purely for selfish reasons (yes, even things you would normally think of as right, such as healing the sick, giving to the poor, etc) then it's wrong according to God's moral code. Gossip definately falls under that category, as well as taking advantage of other people through various ways (look at health care and how it charges the rich more than the poor...perfect example).
Re: Some thoughts...crazillaOctober 15 2007, 14:46:44 UTC
There are a couple of distinctions between this topic and the one from our earlier conversation, at least to me: One is the idea that there's some objective measure of what people deserve, based on what they've done (and, presumably, been through); whether it exists or not, i don't consider it worth consideration when it comes to one's own moral code, since no individual would be able to gauge another's worth in order to act according to it anyway.
The topic of this note is willful, conscious exploitation of (possibly a broad class of) people; whereas in our earlier conversation it was emotionally-motivated (see third paragraph above), possibly unwillful, and possibly unconscious exploitation of someone on a personal level. The latter, i feel, is best resolved by the individuals determining how much they themselves are willing to put up with to preserve whatever would be lost by ending the situation (on the part of the exploiter, maybe some freedom or comfort; on the part of the exploited, possibly a significant relationship). The former can be somewhat objectively condemned because the exploiter's motives are more rational (not emotional) and the exploited not in a position to recognize such motives or even interact with the exploiter to rectify them.
I should also mention that when i pose question in LJ, they're rarely questions i haven't thought about, and very often i have my own personal (partial) answers to them. ^_^
It's often lamented that no one does anything for purely selfless reasons, and i've come to accept at least that no act is verifiably altruistic. Inversely, is anything ever done for purely selfish reasons? Whether or not, they too could never be verified. It's the shakiness of this ground that's partially to credit for my unwillingness to assign worth and guess at what others deserve.
But here, it sounds like you're starting to rethink it at least. Is it morally acceptable for people to use other people (by overcharging them or gossiping about them or using them in various other ways)? Most people would say no. However, what is morality? What standard do we use to judge what is wright and wrong? My business teacher says that it's not wrong to ask the rich for a higher price because they can pay more, and if you are charging more to the poor for something and they're willing to pay it, that's their own stupidity. Capitalizing on others is how the world goes round. Who's right?
You're not going to be able to answer questions like this, Cory, unless you sudenly discover some sort of moral standard by which to hold people up against. And when you do find one, who's to say that it's right? Who's to say that your moral code is more right than my business teacher's moral code?
On that note, in answer to your question, I will base my answer off of the only moral code I know of tha has SOME authority: God's moral code. Compared to God's moral code, none of what you mentioned is right under ANY circumstances. Gossip is especially not to be dismissed as just a means of pointing out negatives among the positives. Gossip is done purely to bring someone down and inflate yourself, purely for selfish reasons. If ANYTHING is done purely for selfish reasons (yes, even things you would normally think of as right, such as healing the sick, giving to the poor, etc) then it's wrong according to God's moral code. Gossip definately falls under that category, as well as taking advantage of other people through various ways (look at health care and how it charges the rich more than the poor...perfect example).
Anywho, just some thoughts.
Reply
The topic of this note is willful, conscious exploitation of (possibly a broad class of) people; whereas in our earlier conversation it was emotionally-motivated (see third paragraph above), possibly unwillful, and possibly unconscious exploitation of someone on a personal level. The latter, i feel, is best resolved by the individuals determining how much they themselves are willing to put up with to preserve whatever would be lost by ending the situation (on the part of the exploiter, maybe some freedom or comfort; on the part of the exploited, possibly a significant relationship). The former can be somewhat objectively condemned because the exploiter's motives are more rational (not emotional) and the exploited not in a position to recognize such motives or even interact with the exploiter to rectify them.
I should also mention that when i pose question in LJ, they're rarely questions i haven't thought about, and very often i have my own personal (partial) answers to them. ^_^
It's often lamented that no one does anything for purely selfless reasons, and i've come to accept at least that no act is verifiably altruistic. Inversely, is anything ever done for purely selfish reasons? Whether or not, they too could never be verified. It's the shakiness of this ground that's partially to credit for my unwillingness to assign worth and guess at what others deserve.
Reply
Leave a comment