Loaded question, perhaps, but as valid as "do you have a god" in its way, and I'm curious. So I'm asking it. ..."/>

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

What would you give your life for?

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Friday, July 16, 2010 20:32
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4076
PAGE 1 of 2

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Loaded question, perhaps, but as valid as "do you have a god" in its way, and I'm curious. So I'm asking it.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:27 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

If I'm the man I hope I am: A life.

Time will tell the tale.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:29 AM

KANEMAN


Boring!!!! A Klondike bar?

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:35 AM

EVILDINOSAUR


I can't really think of anything I would willingly give my life for. I'm sure there's some scenario where it would happen and it would likely be a gut reaction, not something where I had time to think about it.

Yea, it's selfish, but as I said in the god thread, I'm under the assumption that this is the only life I get, I'm not about to give it up easily.

"Haha, mine is an evil laugh."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:37 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


......Ill wait till the snarks and the selfish posts are out of the way....

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:42 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree, Anthony. I can't know if I would do it, and like EvilD said
Quote:

it would likely be a gut reaction, not something where I had time to think about it
I'd really like to think I'd endanger myself for someone's life, but I can't know unless given the chance, can I?

I have a suspicion I might blunder out of instinct into situations where a person or an animal is endangered and endanger my own life by doing so, but I don't know if I could manage to DECIDE to do so if I had time to think about it.

It's an interesting question to ask of ourselves isn't it?


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:48 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


I know very well my own answer, and have, after about the 3rd time, never asked it of myself again.

My wife says that people who willingly jump into harms way to help another are "selfish" in that they don't care about themselves or the family they have/might leave behind.

Its a long standing argument beween us. Her view being "Those who willingly die to save another dont believe they have anything to live for."

I disagree. But I've never been able to win the argument.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:53 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

Those who willingly die to save another dont believe they have anything to live for
I'm not sure about that...I think I have plenty to live for and am grateful every day. But I think a kind of instinct can take over which shuts out the brain and logical thinking for some people at certain times!


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:55 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Well, in our case, and after all the shit I've gotten myself into... she does have the right to make that point.

ETA: Somehow telling her that I've set her up for life, with life-insurance payouts and whatnot, doesnt seem to help... and makes her more angry.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 9:55 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

I know very well my own answer, and have, after about the 3rd time, never asked it of myself again.

My wife says that people who willingly jump into harms way to help another are "selfish" in that they don't care about themselves or the family they have/might leave behind.

Its a long standing argument beween us. Her view being "Those who willingly die to save another dont believe they have anything to live for."

I disagree. But I've never been able to win the argument.


She's looking at it practically, you're looking at it romantically. Or sentimentally - depending on whether or not your romanticism has lost touch of all practicality.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:00 AM

HKCAVALIER


Wulf,

I've found a useful way of thinking about it is in terms of triage. Y'know, someone is gonna die, that's a foregone conclusion, but we sometimes find ourselves in the terrible, unenviable position of being the one to decide who it is. I believe that only you, the individual in the moment, have the power or the right to decide who needs saving. Sometimes the connection we feel between ourselves and another person is so complete that we cannot bear to see that other person parish and will do whatever we can to keep them alive. I wouldn't so much call it selfish as I would call it...heroically promiscuous, maybe? If you discern that the life before you is worth saving, even at the risk of your own, that is your sacred personal business, no?

Triage is also the way I resolve the issue of killing another person out of self-preservation: this person is trying to kill me, someone is going to die and I am in the terrible position of being able to decide which one; I'd rather we both live, but if that isn't possible, I reserve the right to choose my life over theirs.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:06 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"She's looking at it practically, you're looking at it romantically. Or sentimentally - depending on whether or not your romanticism has lost touch of all practicality."

Hello,

I doubt that. Not wanting to be abandoned by a loved one who throws away their life for strangers is probably equally sentimental and romantic and selfish. One wonders whether the woman involved would be willing to die to save her husband or her child. If so, she exposes the true romantic sentiment behind her desire to keep her husband from spending his blood.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:11 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


People sometimes use the argument that those who commit suicide are selfish, too, and I can see the logic in that. But to me it IS a personal thing; I wouldn't condemn another for helping someone out if it would endanger their life, but neither would I consider someone dived in "selfish". Our lives are our own in the end; decisions about suicide and endangering ourselves to save another are PERSONAL decisions and don't need to be condemned or commended by anyone else.

You could look at it another way; isn't it selfish if a person didn't act, because the loss of them might impact their family, when their beliefs/feelings are that they should act? Who is being selfish under those circumstances? Isn't it kind of like "don't help him, WE need you to support US"? I guess in a way that comes down to loyalties, but I still disagree.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:12 AM

MALACHITE


ETA: Anthony said, "I doubt that. Not wanting to be abandoned by a loved one who throws away their life for strangers is probably equally sentimental and romantic and selfish."

Yeah, if she were looking at it practically, the fact that the insurance is all taken care of should help the situation. But, from the sounds of it, she really loves her some Wulf and no amount of money would make losing him any easier...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:17 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


After one of my more ... ridiculous... attempts at being heroic (NO, I was not wearing a mask... just letting you know) the judge ordered me into counseling.

Well, to make a long story short...

Sometimes being "heroic" is compusary. You HAVE to do it. Its not like someone chosing at the last second to help someone else (see Wesley Autrey) but more along the lines of..

Here is a dangerous situation with someone needing help. Noone was ever there to help you and goddamit but you are going to be there to help someone and fuck the consequences. Yes, I know, you hear that rational part of your mind telling you not to do it, that this could really hurt and at the worst kill you, but ignore that shit. You see that person, they need someone, and since noone else is standing up, and even if some are calling 911, you need to get in there and do something NOW. NOW, NOW. NOW.

And in the end you say fuck it and run into some stupid fire to help people who need it.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:18 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Yeah, if she were looking at it practically, the fact that the insurance is all taken care of should help the situation. But, from the sounds of it, she really loves her some Wulf and no amount of money would make losing him any easier...

True enough. But she has practical arguments, whereas I sense Wulf doesn't, only romantic ones (about the beauty of heroism etc.).

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:22 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"You could look at it another way; isn't it selfish if a person didn't act, because the loss of them might impact their family, when their beliefs/feelings are that they should act? Who is being selfish under those circumstances? Isn't it kind of like "don't help him, WE need you to support US"? I guess in a way that comes down to loyalties, but I still disagree."

Hello,

It may be that every single thing humans do is selfish.

If they blindly follow orders or conform to the mob, then they are relieving themselves of the burden of decision and personal responsibility. That is selfish.

If they make a choice to benefit themselves in a tangible fashion, they are being selfish.

If they make a choice to sacrifice themselves on behalf of others, to satisfy a personal belief or morality, then they are doing it for self satisfaction, and that is selfish.

If they do something to avoid a feeling of guilt or shame, or to preserve a sense of honor so that they don't have to live with regret, then that is selfish.

Everything we do is selfish. But society tends to view something as unselfish when it helps others as well. We promote this sort of selfishness, enshrined in codes of honor or morality or rules of behavior, because it is deemed to help society as a whole, even if it also satisfies a need of the individual.

--Anthony


Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:30 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

Something else to add: A good book that addresses the selfishness of man is Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad.

In this book, the main character begins by selfishly preserving himself instead of trying to save ship's passengers under his care.

Then, when this cowardice is exposed, he selfishly flees from port to port, trying to escape his own infamy. In the process, he surrenders several positive relationships and friendships because he can not live with his shame.

Later, out of a selfish desire to reclaim his honor, he fights for native peoples in a far flung corner of the world.

Finally, he sacrifices his life out of selfishness, unwilling to preserve himself at the cost of others, and taste again the bitterness that started the tale.

His actions run the full gamut from cowardice to heroism, but never is he anything less than selfish. Throughout the whole book, he is on a quest to become the man he wants to be. Once he achieves that goal, he prefers to die as that man, rather than live as anything less. He leaves behind him loyal friends and a devoted wife, who can never quite forgive him for abandoning her when he had other options available.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:40 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
Hello,

Something else to add: A good book that addresses the selfishness of man is Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad.

In this book, the main character begins by selfishly preserving himself instead of trying to save ship's passengers under his care.

Then, when this cowardice is exposed, he selfishly flees from port to port, trying to escape his own infamy. In the process, he surrenders several positive relationships and friendships because he can not live with his shame.

Later, out of a selfish desire to reclaim his honor, he fights for native peoples in a far flung corner of the world.

Finally, he sacrifices his life out of selfishness, unwilling to preserve himself at the cost of others, and taste again the bitterness that started the tale.

His actions run the full gamut from cowardice to heroism, but never is he anything less than selfish. Throughout the whole book, he is on a quest to become the man he wants to be. Once he achieves that goal, he prefers to die as that man, rather than live as anything less. He leaves behind him loyal friends and a devoted wife, who can never quite forgive him for abandoning her when he had other options available.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews, Wulfenstar. I apologize for the inconvenience.



Sounds interesting.

I wouldn't say selflessness doesn't exist, only that it is rare (like most beauty). And I would agree 'heroism' can be motivated by selfishness: like suicide bombing - motivated by the promise of glory, and heavenly reward (at least in part); but thoroughly impractical and damaging to all parties.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:41 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


... and all we have here is an argument to BE selfish.

Toss yourself on a grenade to save your friend... why, you are being selfish. You've "foolishly" given up your life, forgotten your family, and did did it all to serve some "simplistic" ideal of heroism.

Sure.

There will always be people who condemn heroic acts. It makes their truly selfish, immoral, evil, and spoiled lives all the more bearable.

There are 2 types of people (maybe more), those who see a heroic action for what it is (and maybe even praise it), and those who must condemn it in order to not hate themselves.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:45 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Yep, a third type: those who fetishise the beauty of heroism and actually make a nuisance of themselves trying to act out hero fantasies...

Not putting that charge on you by the way, but it ought to be included. I agree with you actually, with your 'throwing yourself on a grenade' example of selflessness and heroism.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:49 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Of course, KPO...

We should just let the people who have "training" handle it...

Cus they are always there and always know what to do...

Yep. TRY and help someone... be a nusiance... it just gets in the way.


ETA: SURE! Let someone be raped in front of you, killed, whatever. Its not YOUR problem right? You called 911, and well those with training and guns and whatnot will handle it... forget the fact that you are THERE, NOW,... forget that even if you are not phycially imposing, doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING, could actually help... make a difference... nope.

WOuldnt want to be one of THOSE people... a nusciance, a person acting out some sort of hero fantasy... nope.

Better to watch (or leave cus you dont want to watch) as someone gets hurt, or killed...

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Its this fucking mentality that I cant stand


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:52 AM

MALACHITE


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Yep, a third type: those who fetishise the beauty of heroism and actually make a nuisance of themselves trying to act out hero fantasies...

Not putting that charge on you by the way, but it ought to be included. I agree with you actually, with your 'throwing yourself on a grenade' example of selflessness and heroism.




KPO, I liked this addition. Wulf, I wasn't meaning to say "Don't sacrifice for others", I was just pointing out that I could understand how a heroic act that ends in death can be painful for those who are left behind.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:52 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
... and all we have here is an argument to BE selfish.

Toss yourself on a grenade to save your friend... why, you are being selfish. You've "foolishly" given up your life, forgotten your family, and did did it all to serve some "simplistic" ideal of heroism.

Sure.

There will always be people who condemn heroic acts. It makes their truly selfish, immoral, evil, and spoiled lives all the more bearable.

There are 2 types of people (maybe more), those who see a heroic action for what it is (and maybe even praise it), and those who must condemn it in order to not hate themselves.




Hello Wulf,

People kept quoting things you'd said that were interesting to me, so I hope you won't mind if I try a dialogue.

Please understand that defining acts of heroism as selfishness is not the same as defining them as wrong.

I believe in heroism. I believe if everyone chose the selfish path of honor and sacrifice and helping our fellow man, the world would be a better place. However, I know myself well enough to know that such notions please me. I also know that choosing otherwise would haunt me. And so, in honesty with myself, I know my choices are based on what I want. And thus, pleasing myself based on my notions, I am a selfish man.

--Anthony

Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:53 AM

HKCAVALIER


I just can't get too excited about the selfishness/selflessness debate. I think Anthony is quite correct from a psychological standpoint: human beings do what we want to do, we act to please our selves even when we think we're pleasing others--we've just internalized their values as our own. We're in charge, folks! Big deal!

It's like we're all brainwashed: "ooh, selfishness baaaaad!" Well then, we're all really, really bad. Get over it!

If you can't love yourself, you ain't gonna love anyone else. If you don't love your own life, then you're not sacrificing much when you give it up to save someone else's.

Selfishness is indistinguishable from selflessness when we recognize our fundamental connection to all life and act accordingly.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 10:56 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


You don't understand what we're saying, Wulf. I have believed as Anthony described for many years now. There is nothing wrong with selfishness, in my opinion, if it serves good. If you can think on it for a minute; being Ghandi or Mother Theresa and denying oneself for others seems heroic, but the person feels good about themselves for doing it; if for no other reason than having lived up to their own principles.

I, too, believe we don't do anything we don't want to--maybe I wouldn't call it "selfish", but "self-serving" or something else. To throw oneself on a grenade to save another is a great thing, in my opinion, but it was done because the person did what he believed in, ergo (if he'd lived!) it would have made him FEEL GOOD about himself.

The more I think about it, the more "selfish" doesn't work...I need another word. But without one, I guess I would say that everything we do, bad or good, that we're not physically FORCED to do, is something we do for ourselves, not for anyone else.

I argued this when people were congratulating me on wanting to go to the Gulf to help out. It's not a selfless thing at all--it will hurt, it's hotter than hades down there and I've only once experienced that kind of humidity, the work will be hard whatever it may be--but it will make me FEEL GOOD to have done something, rather than being helpless. That's the best example I can give you...even suffering makes us feel good about OURSELVES.

So it's not cowardice or heroics, it's that were driven most strongly by what we believe, believe in, and what makes us feel "right". Admittedly, people like those here who can do nothing but be vicious don't actually feel good about what they do--underneath--but it gives them conscious satisfaction, so they THINK it makes them feel good. It's only that they're not self-aware, and may never be, but if they never are, they will never love themselves (so they can never truly love anyone else) or be truly happy, and that's sad. It's what makes those kinds of people who are perpetually angry.

Am I explaining this in any way that makes sense? Because I'd like to explain it enough that you can see that "selfishness" isn't just keeping the last cookie for yourself, etc., it's about what you feel is "right"--because what you do that follows what you feel right makes you feel GOOD.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:00 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh, damn, while I was writing that, everyone else came up with the same stuff. Sorry about that!

Well, I just hope that all of us trying to explain, one or the other of us did so in a way that you can understand. It's an important concept...I still don't think "selfishness" works as the right word, as it indicates the leaving out of others in order to please ourselves...there has to be a better word which encompasses the fact that acting in a way that makes us feel good can also be seen as selflessness, when it's not in reality.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:01 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Saying that saving someone else (or anything heroic) is selfish, demeans the act.


You didn't HAVE to do it. Maybe, just maybe, you knew you would die, or that at the very least, you wouldn't be congratulated for it.

Maybe, it was just the right thing to do, damn the consequences.

Maybe, at that last moment, you did it becuase you were thinking of someone else, not yourself?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:09 AM

MINCINGBEAST


A single life is worthless; even my own. Hence, there is nothing I would give it for, knowing I could expect nothing meaningful in return, and that the offer would be empty or insulting.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:16 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Sigh...I guess we failed. Okay, I'll try one more time and see if I can do a better job.

By doing something we don't have to do, that doesn't make it any less self-serving, which I think is a better term than "selfish". Whatever we do SERVES us...even throwing oneself on a grenade to save another is acting on our beliefs, so it makes us feel good. And yes, BECAUSE we believed it's the right thing to do, so doing the right thing, whatever the consequences, makes us feel good about ouselves; we've lived up to our beliefs, as it were. In other words, it SERVED us; the other person is saved, which is a good thing, but we did it because it's what we believe in, and that is more important than running away.

Even the "thinking of someone else" serves US, because it makes us a better person for doing so; sacrifice and heroism give the person doing them good feelings about what they did...ergo it serves the self.

Is that any better? I won't try again if I wasn't able to explain it well enough for you to undersand it, but I hope you do.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:22 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Well, whats your point then?

Being heroic = being selfish = being good?

Ok. Lets say I buy that argument.

Whats the higher point then?

How do we get people to be more "selfish" in the heroic sense?


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:27 AM

KIRKULES


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:

Sometimes being "heroic" is compusary. You HAVE to do it. Its not like someone chosing at the last second to help someone else (see Wesley Autrey) but more along the lines of..

Here is a dangerous situation with someone needing help. Noone was ever there to help you and goddamit but you are going to be there to help someone and fuck the consequences. Yes, I know, you hear that rational part of your mind telling you not to do it, that this could really hurt and at the worst kill you, but ignore that shit. You see that person, they need someone, and since noone else is standing up, and even if some are calling 911, you need to get in there and do something NOW. NOW, NOW. NOW.

And in the end you say fuck it and run into some stupid fire to help people who need it.


I think that most people if they stop and think about it would not risk their life for someone they don't even know. A pretty large percentage of people will give their life to save another in a split second decision. You just can't help yourself because your empathy for others just takes over. I've never done anything heroic in my life, but I've run out into traffic to save a dog without thinking of the consequences. There's no way I'd have done it if I had even a second to think.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:42 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Oh, man, Wulf, that's the $64,000 question. If you figure it out, PLEASE let me know! Some people are more self-aware than others...self-awareness leads to acceptance of ourselves for all our flaws leads to loving ourselves leads to loving others. But few people are self-aware or even WANT to be...most people just go along getting along and don't think beyond that.

Even those of us who prize self-awarness never fully accomplish it. Hell, I KNOW I've got tons and tons of flaws, and all the self-awareness I've worked for doesn't seem to get rid of them. But the TRYING makes me feel better about myself, and just trying brings positive results, just never perfection.

So how do you make people WANT to be self-aware? That's the biggie...because trying to look at ourselves is scary as hell; who wants to be scared? Who wants to see their own flaws? You can't convince anyone that doing so will make them feel better in the end...it's too scary and most people can't imagine the rewards.

BUT, if even partial self-awareness is achieved, it helps us relate to others, empathize if you will, and the more we do that, the less we see heroes and villains, and the more precious every life becomes. The more precious every life becomes, the more willing we are to go out of our way, even to the point of putting ourselves in danger, to help other lives.

Also, the less we can be manipulated into hating others, into wars, into violence, into dehumanizing one another, into pleasuring ourselves AT THE EXPENSE of others, etc. I think I WOULD call it 'self-serving' rather than selfish; to me "selfish" means "excluding others", whereas "self-serving" means serving myself, but not necessarily at the cost of others.

But how do we make that first step? I have no idea whatsoever. I wish to hell I knew!

Yeah, Kirk, I've run out in traffic after dogs too; difference is, I do it even if I think about it. But that's because it's a principle I try to live by, it's important to ME; I know that if I don't and I see the dog hit by a car, it's going to make me feel horrible and the memory will be a long time going away, and I'll be angry with myself for not helping. I won't feel "guilty" per se, as it wasn't my responsibility to help, but I'll regret it. So the potential good outweighs the potential bad, and I choose to do what makes me feel--maybe not necessarily "good" about myself, but less bad about the results.

Does that make any sense? If not, it's because I've been on here far too long today; time I got off and did some housework...


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:46 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Of course, KPO...

We should just let the people who have "training" handle it...

Cus they are always there and always know what to do...

Yep. TRY and help someone... be a nusiance... it just gets in the way.


ETA: SURE! Let someone be raped in front of you, killed, whatever. Its not YOUR problem right? You called 911, and well those with training and guns and whatnot will handle it... forget the fact that you are THERE, NOW,... forget that even if you are not phycially imposing, doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING, could actually help... make a difference... nope.

WOuldnt want to be one of THOSE people... a nusciance, a person acting out some sort of hero fantasy... nope.

Better to watch (or leave cus you dont want to watch) as someone gets hurt, or killed...

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Its this fucking mentality that I cant stand




So you don't like my third category then...

I tell you what, a man can be effective and useful going out of his way to be a hero (depending on the man) - so not necessarily a nuisance. But it's not the same as the man who acts heroically because the situation is thrust upon him (and not because he *wants* to be 'the hero').

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:48 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


KPO... do both have the same outcome?

Then they ARE the same

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:52 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Just noticed Kirk's quote of your post, above. You said it there: for you it's COMPULSORY. You don't question it; ergo it's a principle deeply enough embeded in you that you don't HAVE to think about it, it's become instinct. That's a bit of self-awareness, if that's ever been tested and you acted.

But you haven't gone far enough. "Heroism" if you will is part of everyday life; it's like seeing someone suffering and needing your help...take that back a step and see someone innocent posting something and, rather than engaging them, saying something nasty. Can you see the correlation? Sure, it's NOTHING like running into a fire, but if you take the principle all the way through, you don't want to be nasty to anyone either.

Caveat: We ALL get angry and only Ghandi or someone like him could manage not to be hurtful. But the concept of seeing everyone, even strangers, as a life of worth--well, the more we can see it, the less we want to lash out, because (excuse the hippieism) we are them are we are them, and hurting them (even if it DOESN'T hurt them, our intention was to do so) hurts us.

Enuff; I'm getting all philosophical and my back hurts. I gotta go. If any of this makes sense to you, Wulf, I beg you to think about it. You score MANY more points--and gain respect--from people if you can grasp all this--than you ever will by being like RivKane or her ilk. You ARE better than them, you are capable of BEING better than them, and I'll never think of you in their class. I just wish your principles were a little wider, that's all. That would be sooo cool...

It's also why I chide Mike, by the way...he KNOWS better and if he's deliberately nasty, he KNOWS it's not a good thing. He can choose to do it, but he knows the reality. I hate to see him stoop because I know all that.

Okay, my preaching is over for the day...just bear in mind, tho' I've LEARNED these things, there is no way I think I'm ANY better than anyone else...I have a ton of a way to go, I've just been given the gift of seeing the path, and I'm on it as a result, that's all. Almost NOBODY gets there, it's the journey that makes us feel good about ourselves. Again: self-serving.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 11:54 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


I agree, Wulf (just saw that exchange). They are the same. It's the principle that makes the man act, whether by conscious choice or by instinct, that makes him a "hero". Whether he consciously wants to be a hero or acts out of instinct, it's still "self-serving" in that it abides by his principles...nobody behaves heroically if it doesn't make them feel good about themselves, whatever the conscious motivation. JMHO.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:10 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
KPO... do both have the same outcome?

Then they ARE the same



I disagree, it's possible that somebody could stop the bad guys/save the day by accident, through some freakish luck (I'm probably thinking of some scene in the simpsons) - like pushing open the door to the bank and smashing the fleeing bank robber in the head, and rendering him unconscious.

Just the same outcome as a hero inside the store who jumped the robber and disarmed and subdued him through bravery, strength and skill... So are these actions the same?

You can't discount motivation in judging the nobility of human actions.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:18 PM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Nicki,

You do realize that a lot of your beliefs, and especially Kwicks, make life harder for people trying to do the right thing. Wake people up, make them care.

You won't care about anything, or do anything, if you have this ingrained expectation that some government will take care of it for you, right?

People, all people. need to do for themselves and others.

Laws, and the like won't do it.

Cops won't save you.

In the end, its just you, and the people around you.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:21 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Quote:

nobody behaves heroically if it doesn't make them feel good about themselves, whatever the conscious motivation. JMHO.

What about Kirkules and the dog? You suspect he was acting on more than impulse and concern for the dog?

I mean it's likely that he would have felt worse about himself if he'd done nothing and let the dog get run over - but you suggest that he must have taken a moment to make that mental calculation, before acting?

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:49 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I tend to believe all of human behavior is based on fear and desire. I don't know which might lead to the risky life-saving of a dog. Perhaps both. If there was no thought in the act, if it was purely instinctual, then it has the same ethical value as squinting at the sun.

I think we try to build societies where people fear doing 'wrong' things and have the desire to do 'right' things. That is why acts of heroism and bravery tend to be lauded, while acts of thievery and thuggery tend to be admonished. We know society tends to function better with certain core values, and we try to instill those values in our citizenry.

However, the programming doesn't always take, or doesn't always take the form we think it will, and so we end up with a wide spectrum of humanity that interprets and acts on their 'programmed' values in varying ways. Niki is right about that, I think. The self-aware, self-analyzing individual is the most free, because they have examined their own programming to some degree, and chosen whether to embrace it, how to embrace it, and how far to take it. They can even choose to alter themselves and deviate from the programming offered- self programming.

In any event, I believe 'heroic' and 'honorable' principles are generally positive and good for society, as long as they are not used as an excuse to view oneself as inherently superior and above your fellow man.

I think we do need laws and organization in our societies, and cops and emergency medical personnel, too. But ultimately, the first responders to any situation are the people in it, and it is their decisions about what they want that will be most influential in the outcome of a crisis.

--Anthony




Due to the use of Naomi 3.3.2 Beta web filtering, the following people may need to private-message me if they wish to contact me: Auraptor, Kaneman, Piratenews. I apologize for the inconvenience.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 2:03 PM

FREMDFIRMA



Anything I believe in.
Quote:

The Board of Governors: This seems a steep price for so small a service: to crush a powerless cripple.

Tan'elKoth: Doubly fools. He does have power. One power: the power to devote himself absolutely to a single goal, to be ruthless with himself and all else in its pursuit. It is the only power he needs - because, unlike the great mass of men, he is aware of this power, and he is willing, even happy, to use it.


That said, while there's plenty of folk who do have the "heroic instinct", it's maybe not always a good IDEA to give into it, something I learned the hard way with more examples than I really would have liked, but the one that stands out most pointedly was trying to break up what I THOUGHT was an attempted rape in progress and turned out to be a domestic dispute over fidelity, resulting in both participants trying to kick the crap outta me.

And there's times when saving someone is the WORST thing you can do, or the meanest - imma fan of such cruel mercy, on a rare occasion, the worst of which was unexpectedly cornering some schmuck who'd been talking a bunch of trash from a position of safe anonymity, at a gathering in Oklahoma...

Upon seeing his pathetic ass, well on his way to a horrible death via mixing Ecstacy and Heroin, being friendless and alone, were I to have kicked his ass it might have given him one ounce of justification for his pathetic existence, one reason to be angry at someone other than himself, one person other than him to blame - and so I smiled, and walked away.

It's one of the most horrible things I've ever done, by my reckoning.

And sometimes "saving" someone, can be like that, remember I witnessed a close friends father go down screaming, all but zombified by the medical establishment in efforts to preserve his life against his wishes and those of his family, despite it being naught more than protracted torture on deaths very doorstep.

So you should ALWAYS question that instinct, always.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 4:29 PM

BYTEMITE


I tried to respond to this earlier, but ended up sounding like something out of some emo teens freakin' diary.

Suffice to say, yes, I would sacrifice myself, it doesn't take much to prompt me to try, and every time I've tried has ended in absolutely abject failure (obviously).

Maybe next time I'll be lucky.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 4:58 PM

IREMISST


I've read your post three times and I still can't reaaly tell if you are asking for help or being darkly sarcastic, so anyway here are some things I've learned...

For some people, happiness comes easy- like breathing air. For others? happiness is more like breathing mud...

You are the ONLY person on this planet that can put in the effort it takes to make YOU happy. Only you can care enough for you to fix you.

Please try to be happy, for years I said the same things. Trying to be happy is much better than trying to dispair. Have a hug, Bytemite- xxx See, I feel better...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:30 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Well, Wulf, you asked a question, I answered it as best I can. You have responded with the same old, tired, trite things you always do. You didn’t understand a word I wrote, which isn’t too surprising; it was worth the try.

Expecting something from a government has absolutely NOTHING to do with anything, I guess it’s just a comfortable thing to go back to for you. The assumption that I have some kind of “ingrained expectation that some government will take care of it” for me is downright weird, since there was no mention of government in, as far as I can tell, this entire thread!
Quote:

People, all people. need to do for themselves and others
Uhhh, I don’t know where you get that as a retort to what I said, as that’s pretty much what I DID say, that if we could all look to ourselves, become self-aware, we could make great strides and would find it easier to do for others. That’s weird that you think that’s a retort.

I said I’d act, so where do “laws” and “cops” even come into it? I said I’d do it myself, I’d put myself in harm’s way to save a life, etc., so where on earth do you get that?

KPO, I was responding to your statement that “a man can be effective and useful going out of his way to be a hero...(or... man who acts heroically because the situation is thrust upon him”. I believe they would be the same; whether he did it to “be a hero” or instinctively, the motivation is pretty much the same...the desire to do good. One may be just more aware of the fact that it would make him feel good than the other (for whom I would argue the knowledge that it would make him feel good about himself is SUBCONSCIOUS), but both want to do good.

None of that has anything to do with “accidents”...you never brought the possibility of accidents into it, so I don’t know where that comes from. In my mind, the motivation of the two examples you gave is similar—both react out of a self-serving motive, whether conscious or unconscious.

As to the dog, you’re not understanding me. Of COURSE he was acting out of concern for the dog...what I’ve been trying to say is that, in a case such as that, the internalized philosophy of preventing harm to a dog is ingrained, instinctive, so that when the philosophy is acted upon, it makes the person feel good about themselves on some level. They may not be aware of it, but it does. It’s called “doing what’s right”, and people who have the basic belief that what’s right is making an effort to prevent others being harmed have fulfilled their belief by acting on it. Mental calculation doesn’t come into it...the belief is ingrained, the brain makes a million calculations a second, ergo it becomes what we’d call “instinct”.

Obviously I’m not explaining well enough, so I’ll just quit.

Byte, can you give yourself any points for trying? That you've tried is BIG, it says something very important about you, and whether you've succeeded or not, it makes you special. Is there any way you can see that? I hope so. Because you are.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:39 PM

BYTEMITE


Darkly sarcastic with a hefty dose of irony. But not untrue, either.

And no, I don't give myself points for trying, because even though I got in there and tried, nothing changed. But I also know I'm going to keep trying, because it's not in me to walk away.

Horray for the poor people I'm trying to help. Must be so comforting knowing they have complete incompetence to help them in their final moments.

Quote:

For some people, happiness comes easy- like breathing air. For others? happiness is more like breathing mud...

You are the ONLY person on this planet that can put in the effort it takes to make YOU happy. Only you can care enough for you to fix you.



Iremisst: You keep making these assumptions that because I'm just fine being single, and because I have a cynical outlook, and because my life ultimately is insignificant relative to the world, the universe, and everyone in it (objective assessment), that I'm unhappy.

My world is full of light and birdsong and blue skies and generally no troubles. Everyone else's world isn't. The problem lies where the two worlds intersect.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:48 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


I would almost certainly give my life for a hypothetical situation.


You can probably bet my life on that.

AURaptor's Greatest Hits:

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 20:32 To AnthonyT:
Go fuck yourself.
On this matter, make no mistake. I want you to go fuck yourself long and hard, as well as anyone who agrees with you. I got no use for you.

Friday, May 28, 2010 - 18:26 To President Obama:
Mr. President, you're a god damn, mother fucking liar.
Fuck you, you cock sucking community activist piece of shit.
... go fuck yourself, Mr. President.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:52 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Wish I knew what you were talking about, but I'M convinced you get points for trying. Not everyone would.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
signing off


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:56 PM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Oh, I'm just saying in general... y'know, responding to the original question.

Q: What would you give your life for?

A: A hypothetical situation.


It's a joke. Maybe a bit too meta for this room...

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, July 15, 2010 6:58 PM

BYTEMITE


We got it. :)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL