more on good guys and bad guys

Apr 16, 2006 19:15

The fundamental building blocks ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 10

so say we all jope April 17 2006, 03:49:18 UTC
Read some Hobbes for a different approach to tyranny vs. freedom. Not familiar with him myself, but was recently referred to his works, and his stand seems relevant to your topic.

Also, for plumbing the philosophical depths of good guys vs. bad guys, get yer arse joined up at hallofdoom. I could use some sounding boards over there, once I get into the analysis phase.

Reply

Re: so say we all onah April 17 2006, 04:41:44 UTC
done! so... do I have to talk about what my special power is?

Reply

jope April 17 2006, 05:30:32 UTC
Only if you want a serious ass-kicking. =) It'll take a little while, but I'll make clearer over time what the intended format is.

Reply


chessdev April 17 2006, 14:20:04 UTC
Heh.....

Your question could easily be: Which religion is right?
-- to which each member of a different church would say "We are".

Who is the "good guy"?? Well, every religious fanatic seems to think "US".

The problem is that "good" and "evil" themselves are often defined by the relationship between 2 people.

Your question (to me), is really "Is there such a thing as *absolute* good"? Meaning is there an ABSOLUTE way of measuring it and making sure we are correct in the choices we make?

And the answer: No. Everything is relative. (in my opinion)

Reply

onah April 17 2006, 15:14:50 UTC
hm. I think I took the religion out of the question with the "all ideologies are potentially equal" thing. and that even if you think your ideology was created by God, it's still interpreted by you... which means it's fallible like all others.

the idea... the real idea behind this... is to provide people a way of stepping outside of their day to day... "I'm always right because I'm me" attitude, which just about everyone in the world has... and give them an alternate way of viewing a conflict. I'm trying to change peoples' points of view. In order to get this, you have to read carefully and think hard about what it really means though, which most people I think are just not willing to do.

Reply

chessdev April 17 2006, 19:26:57 UTC
Unfortunately most people are not prepared to evaluate their own viewpoints.

People create elaborate mental mechanisms of cognative dissonance to *protect* themselves from the possibility they may have been wrong. Unfortunately, since life is often "grey" instead of Black and White, everyone will always cling to hope that what they've always believed in was correct.

I support your effort for "truth". I have just given up on believing people are actually ready for it...

Reply

onah April 17 2006, 19:58:29 UTC
well, the two of us can just accept that most people won't really seek the TRUTH. haha. they don't have to follow if they don't want to. We can try to have an interesting discussion with or without them though. eh?

so what do you think about my thing here. I think it's a pretty reasonable idea. it's fairly simplistic, but I think there's a good chance that it might be more correct than most alternatives. That is, I think this piece is quite defensible, at least against casual arguments. I like when simplistic arguments are close to correct because they tend to be simple enough to follow... and they satisfy my scientific and spiritual cravings for symmetry and balance.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up