Bliss VERSUS Free Will - Page 6

Dante · 05-21-2004, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merriam-Webster Online dictionary

Ethics:

1 plural but singular or plural in construction : the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation

2

a : a set of moral principles or values
b : a theory or system of moral values <the present-day materialistic ethic>
c plural but singular or plural in construction : the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group <professional ethics>
d : a guiding philosophy

Morality:

1

a : a moral discourse, statement, or lesson
b : a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson

2
a : a doctrine or system of moral conduct
b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct

3 : conformity to ideals of right human conduct

4 : moral conduct : VIRTUE

Draw your own conclusions, but if it were me, I'd try not to exercise my free will to deprive somebody else of his. It's one thing to be free. It's another to be an asshole.

Lucas · 05-21-2004, 11:29 PM

cheese dogs assure death in 100 years.
...
the semantics of this are annoying me, i've rewritten the same few lines like a bazillion times. basically put, if the value of free will itself regardless of actions to be used or undertaken by this free will is existant, then barring other variables, actions taken to preserve free will are good. the problem arises when other things come into play: if someone tried to kill themselves, if you stop them, you prevent them from exercising free will, but you also allow them to make more choices while alive. now that i think about it, the only reason you'd keep someone alive is if you believe in life as more valuable than the state that exists after death.

wheee... and down the rabbit hole we go!

Mental-Rectangle · 05-22-2004, 09:59 PM

Here's a more interesting question, I think, than the topic for this thread:

Suppose you were one of the independant-thinking members of the government of this hypothetical society, and were benefitting in every way that a citizen would benefit, plus immortality, an already free will, and a well-established place in this upper society.

The people under you are all sheep. They're mindless, and don't care about their fates.

Would you free them? Knowing it'd destroy the entire society and ruin your own universally perfect portion of it, and not knowing if an independant society could ever emerge from the ashes from these genetically altered packmules, would you do it out of kindness of human spirit? They may well go crazy and destroy the world. They're competent in many ways, but they have no will to live other than to serve you.

Heh? Or keep them locked up?

Forever Zero · 05-22-2004, 10:30 PM

Damn, that IS a good question... And that is really hard.

On the one hand, I already view humanity as sheep at times. They are easily mallable to political and economic manipulation, and mob instinct is alive and well and meaning that the more people are doing it, the more that will. Plus I have my free will, and Immortality itself. I have everything I could ever want, ever, and live in a position close to Ruler of the World...

On the other hand, we are doing a hideously ammoral thing and twisting human lives into shadows of their former selves, and playing God in the sense of deciding who will be applied to what task, and what mental training and manipulation they will undergo to get there. Free Will lies in a crushed heap at our feet, and I sit alone with my Immortality. No one will truely be as smart as me, or be my equal. Sure, there are the other memebers of the government, but who knows what sort of people would end up as my "Allies" in this. I would spend the rest of eternity with no meaningful human contact, with only my knowledge as one of the last ones with free will to try and comfort me...

My Morals tell me one way, but my Wisdom says to go another way...

Lucas · 05-23-2004, 01:32 AM

I don't really think that the position of free thinker would really affect my judgement on this one. if the society has no purpose, then i'd dismantle it, and let the chips fall where they may. if the purpose was one i didn't believe to be moral (i.e. it was created to subjugate the entire population of the world under one order, or something), then i'd dismantle it. if the purpose was one i deemed moral, i'd let it stay. this of course barring the potential that all of humanity would be lost. i wouldn't go and risk our entire species for free will, when there's already a group that has it.

MP37a · 05-23-2004, 09:42 AM

Eternal bliss without independent thought isn't real bliss. It would be like being drugged up all the time, completely uncaring about the world at all around you. I wouldn't even call that living. It'd be really creepy if that's how things were. Beside you need ups and downs in life. Take the sour with the sweet because it makes the sweet oh so much sweeter.

EDIT: And I'd set them free. I would never want to live in a world where ppl couldn't think for themselves. It's much more much interesting with conflict. It'd be so boring if everyone did what you wanted. There'd be no changes there'd be absolutely nothing. I for one need conflict in my life. I need ppl to challenge me or to debate or at least agree with me of their own free will. Whether that were completely destroy society or not doesn't matter. It's not about the destination of our future but the journey I think.

AnonCastillo · 05-23-2004, 11:24 AM

Moral question: If they don't have free will, is it really wrong to kill them?
After all, without free will, they will never make another choice as long as they live. They're not even sheep - they're less than that. Without the ability to choose, what are they? Do they still have rights?

Krylo · 05-23-2004, 06:01 PM

You're right, Anon. They're nothing. Doesn't matter if you kill them.

As for 'what are they', either workers or toys, depending on what you do with them.

Also: I'd probably go a good century or two with the continued subjugation, then get bored/lonely, and start dismantling the system from the inside (slowly returning freewill to the people, etc.) I'm really not a very humanitarian person... I'd only free them because without others having free will I'd be extremely lonely/bored.

BitVyper · 05-23-2004, 08:34 PM

Only someone with free will could can choose between the two. The blissfully ignorant have no such choice.

Of course, I wouldn't have just eaten the fruit; I'd have been proud of it. The funny thing is, I believe that would have gotten me off without punishment. Didn't God really punish Adam because he'd immediately chosen to do evil by lying about it? (And this is by no means designed to provoke a religion debate.)

I've always identified well with the Cain(although I'm not sure why Cain always gets put in that role,) or Lilith archetypes. I want to be as independant as possible. I want to live according to my own will, and nothing else.

Edit: Killing them is no different than dismantling a robot. We aren't alive without free will. Not in the figurative sense anyway.

Dragonsbane · 05-24-2004, 07:15 AM

The main source of my happiness is through challenge, excitement, and achievement....all of which are lacking from the "perfect" societies shown. A world in which I would be genetically altered to just enjoy whatever job I did would lack all of those things, thus inducing boredom.....

Without free will, how could we decide whether we are happy or not, anyway?

Call me crazy, but I'll choose free will over perfect sheeplike bliss any day....

05-22-2004, 10:30 PM	#54
Forever Zero Saint of Stats Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: The End Of The World Posts: 5,646	Damn, that IS a good question... And that is really hard. On the one hand, I already view humanity as sheep at times. They are easily mallable to political and economic manipulation, and mob instinct is alive and well and meaning that the more people are doing it, the more that will. Plus I have my free will, and Immortality itself. I have everything I could ever want, ever, and live in a position close to Ruler of the World... On the other hand, we are doing a hideously ammoral thing and twisting human lives into shadows of their former selves, and playing God in the sense of deciding who will be applied to what task, and what mental training and manipulation they will undergo to get there. Free Will lies in a crushed heap at our feet, and I sit alone with my Immortality. No one will truely be as smart as me, or be my equal. Sure, there are the other memebers of the government, but who knows what sort of people would end up as my "Allies" in this. I would spend the rest of eternity with no meaningful human contact, with only my knowledge as one of the last ones with free will to try and comfort me... My Morals tell me one way, but my Wisdom says to go another way... __________________ "For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast, And breathed in the face of the foe as he pass'd; And the eyes of the sleepers wax'd deadly and chill, And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!" - The Destruction of Sennacherib

05-23-2004, 09:42 AM	#56
MP37a Sacred Samurai Gunslinger Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Wellsville, Ohio Posts: 643	Eternal bliss without independent thought isn't real bliss. It would be like being drugged up all the time, completely uncaring about the world at all around you. I wouldn't even call that living. It'd be really creepy if that's how things were. Beside you need ups and downs in life. Take the sour with the sweet because it makes the sweet oh so much sweeter. EDIT: And I'd set them free. I would never want to live in a world where ppl couldn't think for themselves. It's much more much interesting with conflict. It'd be so boring if everyone did what you wanted. There'd be no changes there'd be absolutely nothing. I for one need conflict in my life. I need ppl to challenge me or to debate or at least agree with me of their own free will. Whether that were completely destroy society or not doesn't matter. It's not about the destination of our future but the journey I think. __________________ "I'm going to wrap you in bacon, and throw you on the grill!!" Last edited by MP37a; 05-23-2004 at 09:52 AM.

05-23-2004, 11:24 AM	#57
AnonCastillo Heathen Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 268	Moral question: If they don't have free will, is it really wrong to kill them? After all, without free will, they will never make another choice as long as they live. They're not even sheep - they're less than that. Without the ability to choose, what are they? Do they still have rights? __________________ Help control the idiot population; remember to have your idiot spayed or neutered.

05-23-2004, 06:01 PM	#58
Krylo The Straightest Shota Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: It's a secret to everybody. Posts: 17,789	You're right, Anon. They're nothing. Doesn't matter if you kill them. As for 'what are they', either workers or toys, depending on what you do with them. Also: I'd probably go a good century or two with the continued subjugation, then get bored/lonely, and start dismantling the system from the inside (slowly returning freewill to the people, etc.) I'm really not a very humanitarian person... I'd only free them because without others having free will I'd be extremely lonely/bored. __________________ I am very tired.

05-23-2004, 08:34 PM	#59
BitVyper History's Strongest Dilettante Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Arcadia Posts: 6,662	Only someone with free will could can choose between the two. The blissfully ignorant have no such choice. Of course, I wouldn't have just eaten the fruit; I'd have been proud of it. The funny thing is, I believe that would have gotten me off without punishment. Didn't God really punish Adam because he'd immediately chosen to do evil by lying about it? (And this is by no means designed to provoke a religion debate.) I've always identified well with the Cain(although I'm not sure why Cain always gets put in that role,) or Lilith archetypes. I want to be as independant as possible. I want to live according to my own will, and nothing else. Edit: Killing them is no different than dismantling a robot. We aren't alive without free will. Not in the figurative sense anyway. __________________ "There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, and the sea is asleep, and the rivers dream. People made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice, somewhere else the tea's getting cold. Come on, Ace; we've got work to do!" Awesome art be here. Last edited by BitVyper; 05-24-2004 at 05:12 AM.

05-21-2004, 11:29 PM	#52
Lucas Shotokan Master Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 529	cheese dogs assure death in 100 years. ... the semantics of this are annoying me, i've rewritten the same few lines like a bazillion times. basically put, if the value of free will itself regardless of actions to be used or undertaken by this free will is existant, then barring other variables, actions taken to preserve free will are good. the problem arises when other things come into play: if someone tried to kill themselves, if you stop them, you prevent them from exercising free will, but you also allow them to make more choices while alive. now that i think about it, the only reason you'd keep someone alive is if you believe in life as more valuable than the state that exists after death. wheee... and down the rabbit hole we go!

05-22-2004, 09:59 PM	#53
Mental-Rectangle Sad Toaster Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 256	Here's a more interesting question, I think, than the topic for this thread: Suppose you were one of the independant-thinking members of the government of this hypothetical society, and were benefitting in every way that a citizen would benefit, plus immortality, an already free will, and a well-established place in this upper society. The people under you are all sheep. They're mindless, and don't care about their fates. Would you free them? Knowing it'd destroy the entire society and ruin your own universally perfect portion of it, and not knowing if an independant society could ever emerge from the ashes from these genetically altered packmules, would you do it out of kindness of human spirit? They may well go crazy and destroy the world. They're competent in many ways, but they have no will to live other than to serve you. Heh? Or keep them locked up?

05-23-2004, 01:32 AM	#55
Lucas Shotokan Master Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 529	I don't really think that the position of free thinker would really affect my judgement on this one. if the society has no purpose, then i'd dismantle it, and let the chips fall where they may. if the purpose was one i didn't believe to be moral (i.e. it was created to subjugate the entire population of the world under one order, or something), then i'd dismantle it. if the purpose was one i deemed moral, i'd let it stay. this of course barring the potential that all of humanity would be lost. i wouldn't go and risk our entire species for free will, when there's already a group that has it.