the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
The Exchange

You are probably familiar with the title sentance if you watch startrek but do you consider your extermination to benefit the many acceptable? Just how many lives can be sacrificed for the greater good?


THE GREATER GOOD


2 people marked this as a favorite.
yellowdingo wrote:
You are probably familiar with the title sentance if you watch startrek but do you consider your extermination to benefit the many acceptable? Just how many lives can be sacrificed for the greater good?

None...as if you start sacrificing people 'for the greater good' it stop being good.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

So long as it is voluntary, it's fine. If not, it is undeniably the most horrendous tagline used in human history. It is even worse than one of the other favourites: Kill them all, God knows his own.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
yellowdingo wrote:
You are probably familiar with the title sentance if you watch startrek but do you consider your extermination to benefit the many acceptable? Just how many lives can be sacrificed for the greater good?

I don't quite understand the question.

On the other hand I've been reading something much more interesting than anything star trek has to say on the limits of altruism... a web comic called Strong Female Protagonist . Of particular relevance is the storyline of chapter three, but I'd advise reading the comic from the start to get the proper background. It's not an answer, but it's one of the best ways I've ever seen the question asked.


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I'd rather figure out what about the child makes them capable of sustaining everyone's good times. If I could replicate it, other cities could be made happy.

It's sort of sad that the world works in the opposite way in reality, where the many suffer for the benefit of the few.

The Exchange

Scythia wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I'd rather figure out what about the child makes them capable of sustaining everyone's good times. If I could replicate it, other cities could be made happy.

It's sort of sad that the world works in the opposite way in reality, where the many suffer for the benefit of the few.

Thats because you sacrifice repeatedly until the many are wittled down to the few who decide the fate of others.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:
You are probably familiar with the title sentance if you watch startrek but do you consider your extermination to benefit the many acceptable? Just how many lives can be sacrificed for the greater good?

I don't quite understand the question.

On the other hand I've been reading something much more interesting than anything star trek has to say on the limits of altruism... a web comic called Strong Female Protagonist . Of particular relevance is the storyline of chapter three, but I'd advise reading the comic from the start to get the proper background. It's not an answer, but it's one of the best ways I've ever seen the question asked.

That comic made me feel so much. I'm crying. D:


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I was stunned at Leguin's moral blindness. Because of it that I've taken no interest in the rest of her work. The problem is in the name: they just walk away.

Well that's nice for them, but what about the kid that they allegedly don't want to see suffer? They just left the little s~!! to rot. No attempt to understand the situation. No attempt to build an alternative. No attempt to ameliorate the kid's suffering. They just close their eyes, pretend their hands are clean, and take a hike. They're a bunch of narcissists.

Sovereign Court

Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I love a LeGuin reference. I have a recording of her reading the story.

Sovereign Court

Samnell wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I was stunned at Leguin's moral blindness. Because of it that I've taken no interest in the rest of her work. The problem is in the name: they just walk away.

Well that's nice for them, but what about the kid that they allegedly don't want to see suffer? They just left the little s**& to rot. No attempt to understand the situation. No attempt to build an alternative. No attempt to ameliorate the kid's suffering. They just close their eyes, pretend their hands are clean, and take a hike. They're a bunch of narcissists.

She's great. You should read A Wizard of Earthsea: brilliant stuff!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The greater good is great in theory but when put into practice it is always a tool of tyranny because it is being forced on whoever has been designated as needing to be disposed of.

Just look at the real examples:

The Nazi thought it was for the greater good.

The communists thought it was for the greater good.

Even the French Revolution that many people admire was in the end about murdering the people who disagree and violently repressing alternate opinions ... All for the greater good.

Liberty's Edge

[Tau mode] For the greater good![/tau mode]


Samnell wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I was stunned at Leguin's moral blindness. Because of it that I've taken no interest in the rest of her work. The problem is in the name: they just walk away.

Well that's nice for them, but what about the kid that they allegedly don't want to see suffer? They just left the little s*## to rot. No attempt to understand the situation. No attempt to build an alternative. No attempt to ameliorate the kid's suffering. They just close their eyes, pretend their hands are clean, and take a hike. They're a bunch of narcissists.

[Zips up fly]

Um, where do I sign for the life-supply of frozen pizza?

Srly, though, while I find your unpacking of the moral of "The Ones" credible, I find your resulting reaction bizarre, but, [shrugs] whatever. Geraint's right though, the Earthsea books kick ass.


Its always a balancing act between the two

The Exchange

Samnell wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I was stunned at Leguin's moral blindness. Because of it that I've taken no interest in the rest of her work. The problem is in the name: they just walk away.

Well that's nice for them, but what about the kid that they allegedly don't want to see suffer? They just left the little s+%# to rot. No attempt to understand the situation. No attempt to build an alternative. No attempt to ameliorate the kid's suffering. They just close their eyes, pretend their hands are clean, and take a hike. They're a bunch of narcissists.

Thats not what its about. Its about why there are poor suburbs in the city in which you live.

The Exchange

'...we who are citizens of the future wander about this present scene like passengers on a ship overdue, in plain sight of a port which only some disorder in the chart room prevents us from entering.' -H.G. Wells on universal freedom.


Scythia wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I'd rather figure out what about the child makes them capable of sustaining everyone's good times. If I could replicate it, other cities could be made happy.

It's sort of sad that the world works in the opposite way in reality, where the many suffer for the benefit of the few.

Hey if you two want to volunteer to be child got no problems with it...otherwise the 'happiness' is a lie.

Anyway happiness come from with in...


{quietly signs up everyone in thread as organ donors}

Wait, I posted in the thread too... ah, nuts.

The Exchange

I still want to see a massive movement of the "green" types refusing to breed for the greater good because humans are killing the planet. Only heard one publicly say that and was verbally torn apart for having the gall.


Andrew R wrote:
I still want to see a massive movement of the "green" types refusing to breed for the greater good because humans are killing the planet. Only heard one publicly say that and was verbally torn apart for having the gall.

Two! (mind you, me promising not to breed is like you promising not to fly)

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
I still want to see a massive movement of the "green" types refusing to breed for the greater good because humans are killing the planet. Only heard one publicly say that and was verbally torn apart for having the gall.
Two! (mind you, me promising not to breed is like you promising not to fly)

Well i could be counted but i chose not to have kids to not spreed genetic problems, not inflicting the pain i feel on another. i am lucky my wife understands.


Andrew R wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
I still want to see a massive movement of the "green" types refusing to breed for the greater good because humans are killing the planet. Only heard one publicly say that and was verbally torn apart for having the gall.
Two! (mind you, me promising not to breed is like you promising not to fly)
Well i could be counted but i chose not to have kids to not spreed genetic problems, not inflicting the pain i feel on another. i am lucky my wife understands.

.... you're married?

*double checks medication dosage*

")

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
I still want to see a massive movement of the "green" types refusing to breed for the greater good because humans are killing the planet. Only heard one publicly say that and was verbally torn apart for having the gall.
Two! (mind you, me promising not to breed is like you promising not to fly)
Well i could be counted but i chose not to have kids to not spreed genetic problems, not inflicting the pain i feel on another. i am lucky my wife understands.

.... you're married?

*double checks medication dosage*

")

Been with her for almost 14 years. You assume i was some loner nerd?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
Been with her for almost 14 years. You assume i was some loner nerd?

partially that, partially it hadn't come up that i recall.

But yes mostly that :)

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Been with her for almost 14 years. You assume i was some loner nerd?

partially that, partially it hadn't come up that i recall.

But yes mostly that :)

Thanks for that. I tend not to talk much about family in public things like this unless it is really relevant.


John Kretzer wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I'd rather figure out what about the child makes them capable of sustaining everyone's good times. If I could replicate it, other cities could be made happy.

It's sort of sad that the world works in the opposite way in reality, where the many suffer for the benefit of the few.

Hey if you two want to volunteer to be child got no problems with it...otherwise the 'happiness' is a lie.

Anyway happiness come from with in...

If I figured out how it worked, I would volunteer. Knowing that I could do something so magnificent as to insure the happiness of an entire city would be wonderful. Also, it would be nice to suffer for a reason, for a change.

In a philosophy course, we discussed the story, with students offering their opinions. One person who had a vehement reaction to the story was appalled at the very concept. The same person both introduced themself as, and frequently reiterated that, they could be identified completely as a Christian (of the evangelical variety). She somehow thought the very concept of a single innocent person suffering for the happiness of others was appalling, but believed wholly that a single innocent had suffered for her benefit. I found it strangely fascinating.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Scythia wrote:
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
I don't know what you're all talking about. I'd happily piss on that little kid in Omelas for [thinks about it] all the frozen pizza I can eat, free internet service, a gobbo girlfriend, and a prescription for whatever neat-o soma the Omelasians can come up with.

I'd rather figure out what about the child makes them capable of sustaining everyone's good times. If I could replicate it, other cities could be made happy.

It's sort of sad that the world works in the opposite way in reality, where the many suffer for the benefit of the few.

Hey if you two want to volunteer to be child got no problems with it...otherwise the 'happiness' is a lie.

Anyway happiness come from with in...

If I figured out how it worked, I would volunteer. Knowing that I could do something so magnificent as to insure the happiness of an entire city would be wonderful. Also, it would be nice to suffer for a reason, for a change.

In a philosophy course, we discussed the story, with students offering their opinions. One person who had a vehement reaction to the story was appalled at the very concept. The same person both introduced themself as, and frequently reiterated that, they could be identified completely as a Christian (of the evangelical variety). She somehow thought the very concept of a single innocent person suffering for the happiness of others was appalling, but believed wholly that a single innocent had suffered for her benefit. I found it strangely fascinating.

First there is world of difference from somebody choosing to suffer for the many than someone who did not. The person in the story is a child...thus probably can not make that choice.

Second Jesus suffered for three days for our sins than went to join his father in heaven....the child's suffering in story seems to be without end...and for no reason so that everyone can enjoy empty(yes in the view of a Christian it is empty) happiness.

Third...personally when I first read the story I thought it was about how society/ the human race/ what have you can and will exploit the innocence.


@Scythia: I respect your choice for being self-sacrificial and would like to think I would also do something similar...though you really don't know till the choice is actually in front of you.

Liberty's Edge

I always interpreted the indescribable other place as death, since its a pretty standard metaphor.


John Kretzer wrote:

Hey if you two want to volunteer to be child got no problems with it...otherwise the 'happiness' is a lie.

Anyway happiness come from with in...

I volunteered to pee on the child, not to be him/her.


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:

Hey if you two want to volunteer to be child got no problems with it...otherwise the 'happiness' is a lie.

Anyway happiness come from with in...

I volunteered to pee on the child, not to be him/her.

I know...and that is about the level of sacrifice I expect from a goblin.

Speaking of which did you see the cover on the new PF novel...it is awesome. :)


No. I'm too busy protesting the consumption of goblin brains at Paizocon 2014. Maybe I should go pee on that thread...


He's a goblin, and "sacrifice" has three syllables. Come on!


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
No. I'm too busy protesting the consumption of goblin brains at Paizocon 2014. Maybe I should go pee on that thread...

Well the theory is if veal taste good because the poor baby calf does not use it's muscle...than goblin brains must be really good because they don't use their brains.


[Pees on Madame Sissyl and Brother Kretzer]


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
[Pees on Madame Sissyl and Brother Kretzer]

I won't derail this thread any further than with side banter....but I am thinking a certain goblin needs to be fixed...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't think fixing prevents the flow of urine, but, you're right, no more side banter, let's all hunker down and ponder the philosophical ramifications of a line from The Wrath of Khan.


NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


yellowdingo wrote:
You are probably familiar with the title sentance if you watch startrek but do you consider your extermination to benefit the many acceptable? Just how many lives can be sacrificed for the greater good?

One less than half, after that it is the lesser good.

The Exchange

Of course not. I'm Chaotic Neutral.


Everyone is important.


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:
No. I'm too busy protesting the consumption of goblin brains at Paizocon 2014. Maybe I should go pee on that thread...

You again? S'teve, get 'im outta 'ere!


[Flashes IBT membership card; relapses into Teamsterese]

Hey Joey, how ya doin'? How's the wife, how's the kids? Yeah, yeah, I hear ya, whattaya gonna do, right?

Hey, lemme ask you somethin', d'you think it's right to let that little kid get pissed on? I think it's terrabell an' the union shoul' do sumthin' 'bout it.


Oh hey man, thought you was with them scuzzheads. Sorry 'bout the false alarm.

Hey man, I'll see what I can do. I got R'occo and F'rankie an' they ain't done any leanin' in a while an' they're startin' ta get bored.

Ya know that ain't real goblin brains, right? 'S jus' mite an' kobold wit' a fresh coat'a paint. Ain't nobody knows th' diff'rence. 'S good business!


Doodlebug Anklebiter wrote:

[Flashes IBT membership card; relapses into Teamsterese]

Hey Joey, how ya doin'? How's the wife, how's the kids? Yeah, yeah, I hear ya, whattaya gonna do, right?

Hey, lemme ask you somethin', d'you think it's right to let that little kid get pissed on? I think it's terrabell an' the union shoul' do sumthin' 'bout it.

Please don't do this....as yuou know I am in the teamster union also...but I am actually in NJ...you are giving me flashback to work.


I wouldn't sacrifice anyone. I would, however, salute and respect those who sacrifice themselves for the good of others.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It is also interesting that Spock is not doing what he said there. He said it when he was sacrificing himself against the direct wishes of the captain. The quote is sincerely misplaced.


Mike Franke wrote:

The greater good is great in theory but when put into practice it is always a tool of tyranny because it is being forced on whoever has been designated as needing to be disposed of.

Just look at the real examples:

The Nazi thought it was for the greater good.

The communists thought it was for the greater good.

Even the French Revolution that many people admire was in the end about murdering the people who disagree and violently repressing alternate opinions ... All for the greater good.

While i do not endorse what the nazis did, they did have a certain dr, dr mengalah? i think it is spelled, kinda fits though. Thanks to his abomination of experiments that were unlawful and horrendous, once his research was confiscated, medical science benefited GREATLY from the horrendous things he did. More lives than we know were saved because of the knowledgehe gained from his horrendous and illegal and very immoral experiments that u wonder if we would have the knowledge that we gained from his work, if we would have that same knowledge today. Problemly with technology the way it is now, but it took us many years to get here and the lives that were saved up til now...slipperly slope.

A monster who terrorized and ruined many lives gave the medical scene an oppertunity to learn many things they could not ever hope to learn without technology due to morals and laws preventing them that has benefited countless people...
Sometimes people do suffer and experience hell and are ruined unintentionally for the greater good.

Also in no way or possible am i even giving said doctor a good view or name or praising his works at all or his actions. He was a monster and i hope he burns.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.