What the Hell are you HUMANS thinking? Birds and other winged creatures only!

looks at speakeasy.... i think its time we started this up agian... i have 2 posts i wish to share...
----------------------------
hu.... the sad thing in my school....

we have seen alot of movies about war in my movies...

screaming... constant pain... Tourcher is the WROST in my optinon you can do... death... its suicide... not as painful...


hu....we saw a few movies... in one movie... (all quiet on the western front)... tehre was a scene when a horse was yelling and yelling and was ingulfed in flames... and the one sensitive soldier... was going to shoot it to give it a quick death... he couldn't take it...

::meanwhile in my class a few kids were laphing than... god... stupied. people.... These f***in a**holes.... THOSE are the kind of people that i hate most of all.... those are the ones that could be...."puriflied" ...in the big o rpg terms...::

in teh movie the officer commanding him told him to not... and... well... the horse just keeped yelling and the soldier just covered his ears....

i may most more examples of how insecitive people can be... skinning babies... how ugly and savage can people be...


-------------------------------
2:....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
::name of god theme starts...it would be nice if you could play this::

Here is another example of the stupitdy of humans....

People belive in others too much... they erly on the govenment to solve problems...

Inmaryland... there was a big blackout a while ago... after a big storm...

there have been reports of major helth problems and people not being able to contact emergency lines because of downed phone lines...

this one woman says taht pepco should be sending medical care to all the people who have no electricity by making it iligal to distribte power otehr wise.... now... she is like many people....

letting emotions getting in the way of common scence... people wine all the time about such things... MCdonalds made me fat!!! these little things... and they are adults!!! come on,.... they should be argueing about (and trying to do something) about terrorism... not just nagging the government about more security!!!

Once they do get more... they begin nagging about how everything is too slow... than they dont go to the air port... than the airposrt losses money... they have to make cut backs... fire a few people... they end up trying to find new jobs... but because of the down economy... there are none that they are qulified for.... AND ITS A HUGE CHAIN!!!

Gate Keepers 21... a great anime... i have thought about these things before this anime... but i think you can guess(if you have seen it)... who my fav char is...

_____________________

ok question... what is the most horrible you thing you have seen... or have most scared you...
---also what is most disurbing?

the most horrible thing i have seen--skinning babies... (sumlimial messages flash movie... a flash that should never be seen)

disturbing things--- screaming... trorcher... like in my first story...
hu.... god i hate those people... ever see kikia or subliminal messages?..... you know what i am talking about... screaming.... a very horrible and almost unnatual noise... it can be...

wow....
that was long O_O
..errr..your spelling sux
...umm...yah...err...rght...uuhhh....I agree with you on that first one...people can be EXTREMELY STUPID.
In my school I can name or at least point to an entire GRADE full of idiots that don't give a damn about themselves (they do drugs), don't care about school (more drasticaly than others), and don't care what the hell they do or where/when they do it.
THese people are the ones that I want to use my rifle on Sadly I can't do that (ran out of ammo ) SOOO I have to put with them.


As for:
"THOSE are the kind of people that i hate most of all.... those are the ones that could be...."puriflied" ...in the big o rpg terms"
I'll let Meggido take care of this one

yeah... mabey i should use word on these type of posts...

well these were all in the speakeasy... ya know.. rush posting... and well... spark of insprastion...

Great points Schwarzwald, all of them.

I read All Quiet on the Western Front last year...oddly enough, although I enjoy history as a subject, I didn't enjoy the book much...

Which is odd, since I generally enjoy reading about history. Historical novels are usually nice to read too, oh well.

I still stand by my belief that rape is perhaps the single greatest crime Humans can commit after murder. Torture is also high on my list as well, but no where near as high as rape and murder.

If we're going to start this thread up again, I've got some questions to ask.

Alright then...this one is fairly simple and straight forward.

What is more important to you, rational thoughts or your raw emotions? To state it more bluntly, if your mind and heart is torn, which do you follow?

hu....my religon part was taken out... well ok... acceptable...

but to the question...

thinking... or raw emotions.... hu... unless we are talking about certain situation where its life and death for someone...

Rational thoughts...
not often are emotions the best choices... sometimes your emotions can destroy your mind in certain situations... like in my post above... either this person is a plain idiot for suggesting such an unreasonable task... Its like that train question... LET the train kill 15... or save the 15 by killing 1.... It all comes down to emotions... but the thinking is logical... btw I choose to kill the 1 for the fate of the 15
the emotional part is that the guy who died can atleast be looked apon as a hero... i surely would go to jail... thinking was logical... but i still killed someone...

it my not be forgive able.. but neither would be letting the train hit 15 people when you had the chance to save them... atleast not by the public... and i dont know what the family of the 1 man would think... could go wither way.... the 1 man might never be able to live with himself and my resort to suicide in the end... many possiblities...

This makes me sad.

i see that the question was inspired by the rpg... hey iv been intending to ask... the part about winged creatures... is that from gate keepers 21?

I don't know, I still stand by my belief that in the train situation, you had no other option but to let them die. How could you save them? By sacrificing another? Who gave you the right to decide who deserves to live and who deserves to die? Let nature take its course, so you cannot be guilty of playing God.

Some might say it's the easy way out, I think it's the way that is more morally acceptable.

But that's just my opinion...

It's like this...do you save 500 dogs, or 1 person?

The morally acceptable answer is 1 person...because we have a soul and are more important...

I'm not sure I agree with that statement, but whatever.

What's the most horrible thing I've seen? Well, I don't think I've seen anything that was truly horrible...I have heard much worse stories than what I have seen (again, just the thought of rape makes me sick. Murder in cold blood is just as bad. Torture...hearing people beg for mercy...that's bad, but as I've affirmed and reaffirmed several times, I think rape is worse.

Hmmm...that is a hard question to answer. Raw emotions are who you are afterall...yet these many times are incorrect and could merely make things worse...

To answer a question like this I have to put myself into a situation...something extremely serious has to have happened. It needs to have filled me with an overwhelming emotion, hatred and rage most likely. It also needs to have severe penalties if I act on those said emotions...death seems to be good...

Situation desciprion: Some viscious, heartless criminal broke into my house and shot my wife, killing her (purely hypothetical mind you, I doubt I'll ever eally get married), he hasn't noticed that I'm in the house as well. Now I have two choices... 1: I can give into my emotions and try to kill that man, he certainly deserves it. 2: I can escape, saving myself but letting the killer go.

Okay, time to over view. This guy has a gun, if I attack him I'll probably get killed. But this bastard also just killed my wife, I feel as though I have to do something. So the question is do I give into my emotions and die or do I stay logical and live, albeit a painful life now. My answer...I give into my emotions. Emotions are who we are, if you don't follow your emotions then yo deny yourself, which is a terrible crime. You have to be logical as much as you can, but in a situation like that no one could help but give into their emotions. What's your answer?

quote:

Originally posted by The Fallen Phoenix I don't know, I still stand by my belief that in the train situation, you had no other option but to let them die. How could you save them? By sacrificing another? Who gave you the right to decide who deserves to live and who deserves to die? Let nature take its course, so you cannot be guilty of playing God. Some might say it's the easy way out, I think it's the way that is more morally acceptable. But that's just my opinion... It's like this...do you save 500 dogs, or 1 person? The morally acceptable answer is 1 person...because we have a soul and are more important... I'm not sure I agree with that statement, but whatever. What's the most horrible thing I've seen? Well, I don't think I've seen anything that was truly horrible...I have heard much worse stories than what I have seen (again, just the thought of rape makes me sick. Murder in cold blood is just as bad. Torture...hearing people beg for mercy...that's bad, but as I've affirmed and reaffirmed several times, I think rape is worse.

hmmm well... now lets say your in court... you have let the 15 people die... the evidence has (the little that you may have)been shown...
and the judge is making his decision...
(not that this affects the discision of letting fate decide)
now here is the time to think... Would the government concider the fact that its a stuck situation (no matter what some one dies)... you had a chance to save them... most people would be agienst your living... would the judge consider it "fate" IF you had a choice to not let all the 15 die?

And the judge... like judge joe brown... some let thier emotions get in the way of law... would you acceopt the fact that you would be widely wanted to be killed by these kinds of people??!?!? People who wernt in this situation... and have never even thought it over? would you accept that? (this is just a question for pheonix btw)

I definately have to agree with you. Following my emotions, I think, supercedes rational thought.

Some say we humans are special because we have the ability to think. That's why (forgive my language) we're so God damned stupid!

Rational thought can never solve anything. Let me give another example:

Would you let your computer decide you you are to marry, based on rational thought? Sure, you might get the perfect marriage, but does that necessaily mean you'll love your spouse? (To me, love is what a marriage should be based on above all else, but I'll get more into what should be the basis of marriage in a later question...and I am eager already to hear the different responses we'll get from that question, from the single, teenage members of the community to those members that are married).

So, yes, I believe that in most cases, emotions ought to supercede rational thought. Not always, but in most cases.

No, the court system would have to try me as innocent. Again, I can bring up that idea of letting people die versus killing someone...they'd have to let me go. There are a few parallels with that philisophical statement going into medicine and science that I can refer to.

If they were to put me on trial, it would be in the hands of a jury, anyway. If they want to let their personal feelings judge the case, fine, I still think they'd be making a terrible mistake.

*applause*

Very well put, Fallen Phoenix. I agree. We must know when to use our emotions and when to supress them. Like Schwartwald says: a person in a position of power should suppress their emotions for that job. A jury shouldn't decide a case based on whether they like the defendent or not, they should decide it basedon the evidence, not the lies perpetuated by our media. Moreove, the fact that humans are capable of logical thought isn't as nuts as you make it sound. Emotions are what really set us apart, that and critical thought. Animals will leave a wounded member of their heard behind, which is logically the best moce. That would ensure a better survival ratio for the rest of the heard. Humans take care of those who are wounded because of our emotions, we feel pity for the wounded and want to save them. Critical thought is what we develop from the conflict of our logical instinct and emotions. Logical instinct is to ensure the greater survival, emotions tell you to do all sorts of illogical things. This is why emotions make us who we are, it is illogical to be seperate, thinking beings. Because of illogicallity and inefficancy we humans are what we are...

quote:

No, the court system would have to try me as innocent. Again, I can bring up that idea of letting people die versus killing someone...they'd have to let me go. There are a few parallels with that philisophical statement going into medicine and science that I can refer to. If they were to put me on trial, it would be in the hands of a jury, anyway. If they want to let their personal feelings judge the case, fine, I still think they'd be making a terrible mistake.

really? you put you faith in people like this? I think you over estimate the average american...

even if you point out that it was fate... there still are matters that could be varied... agian you have CHOICE... people will suddenly look at that and hey but you COULD have let the one die... man that guy is an idot... i agree with the fate thing... but it may take awhile for the people to actually understand it... technicly you let them die... but you had a choice... it depends on how you look at it... You may be considard innocent... but than agian you may be considared guilty...
Most people just wouldn't understand this concept unless explained to them directly... and would the judge even let you?

And I put my opinoin in an average american BECAUSE these are the people that argued about mefical help to pepco(refer to first post of mine on this page)...

are you sure your being honest with yourself? Do you think after the event you could live with yourself that you let 15 die? There are two different ways of looking at this choice.. you choose it.. so than agian it mauy not beconsidard fate... people don't see... Its like the people that laugh at other peoples pain in all quest in the western front... Do you really strongly see as .. choosing to let 15 people to die... fate?



this is what the people who could be judgeing you be... will you accept these? Would you put your faith in such people? There are godd people... quite a few... and friends that understand... but these people may totally refuse to understand... may not accpet you... will look at you as a cold blooed killer..... and scence you had a choice.. in one view... may be true...

Like I said before, I have no way of choosing how I will be tried. I wouldn't be able to decide the situation. I have no way of preventing myself from being judged by corrupt people, I have no way of getting myself judged by good people.

But, when I am acting, in the heat of the moment, deciding whether I should switch tracks or not, am I worried about being a hero? Am I worried about being held accountable for my actions?

If I am, then I'm the worst person to have in that scenario.

No, I will do what I feel is right. They might not agree with me, but I know I can live with the idea that I let fifteen people die when I had no other option. I'm sorry, but in a scenario where I msut choose whether or not to kill, that is not an option. Again, I have no right to play God--I could not live myself if I did. They don't have to agree with me. Hell, I could care less if they did. They weren't in the situation...they didn't have the choice of kill or let die.

I'd have to think back and say, look what I've done, I have decided that this man's life is forfeit, someone I probably have never even met, a fellow man like me. Hell, he could be a better man than me, for all I know.

And I am supposed to live with the idea that, well, his death was justified--it saved the lives of 15 people.

Only yourself can decide whether or not your life is worth more than the lives of fifteen people. I have no right to make the choice for you. I have no right to say, "Schwarzwald, your life is meaningless as compared to the rest of the forum, therefore, you must die," or "The Big Omega, we must sacrifice you for the good of the people. You have no say in the matter, it's just I, myself, a fellow Human like you, without asking you, decided to end your life (and remember, death is permanent) for the greater good of 15 people. Sorry, you know how it is.

That is the main point I am making here--under no circumstances can a Human be allowed to decide who does and does not die. By letting the train go, I cannot be held accountable...I had no other choice. I'm not looking to be a savior, I'm not looking to be a villain.

I just want to do what I know in my heart is right...

I'll present you with another situation. You're trapped inside a cage and watch as a group of people rape and beat a young woman to death. You want to help, but you can't. Now, you later escape. Will the courts put you on trial for doing nothing to save the young woman?

Now, let's say you are trapped with another person, and you can get to the woman. However, that person has no intention of saving the woman, since the only way you can escape is by having one of you die. So, do you kill your fellow prisoner in order to save the woman, or do you do nothing and let the woman die, knowing you can't do anything unless you commit the very crime you're trying to prevent?

Let's change the train situation...to that there is one person on either track. Now what do you do? Let the train hit the one person, or do you decide to switch tracks and kill the other?

My logic still holds up here...I am letting the person die because I have no other choice.

Your logic, is that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...well, it's just 1 versus 1 now. How do you play God? Who do you choose to kill?

True, Fallen Phoenix. But you don't seem to understand that letting those 15 people die is just as good a killing them. You were able to prevent their deaths and you didn't do anything, thusly you did kill them. So you are saying to those 15, "Sorry, but because of the way I think I;m going to let this train hit you guys because if I change it so that it just hits that one guy I think of it as murder." But anyway, to further the point, I thought that the train was completely out of control and you would die no matter what, thusly you could not be put on trial. As for that one person on each track, I just won't switch it. Either way one person will die, I guess it's that guy's fate to die today...

wow... ok you made a good point up there.... but still... there is the debate about how you look at it... you had a choice... i still think that you honestly could be a killer... like me....

now that situation.... first of all i dont see why you would need to kill your partner but putting that asside... i wouldn't have the gut to attempt this... with all the yelling and screaming... my mind may end up being destroyed from the experience... not unlike that sublimal messages flash movie with the baby skinning... tell me if you want the link... but its best to watch it with no volume... the prayer sound is haunting enough...

now.. hmm... ok we save 1 women... or anohter person who.. wither is scared... or just plain doesn't care... what are his feelings about it?

quote:

Originally posted by The Big Omega True, Fallen Phoenix. But you don't seem to understand that letting those 15 people die is just as good a killing them. You were able to prevent their deaths and you didn't do anything, thusly you did kill them. So you are saying to those 15, "Sorry, but because of the way I think I;m going to let this train hit you guys because if I change it so that it just hits that one guy I think of it as murder." But anyway, to further the point, I thought that the train was completely out of control and you would die no matter what, thusly you could not be put on trial. As for that one person on each track, I just won't switch it. Either way one person will die, I guess it's that guy's fate to die today...

You contradict yourself. You say letting the 15 die is as good as killing them, and at the bottom you say it's the one man's fate to die today.

Same with the 15. Unless, all of a sudden, some people's lives become more important than others...

The case I'm making is that I can't be guilty of letting them die, because I have no other option. Hence I brought up two other, similar situations with the same premise--to show that in effect, what you'd be doing is preventing a murder...through murder. (I don't like this language, but it migth be a bit more clear, even if it isn't very accurate).

Morally, if you let the train keep going, it's not considered murder. I did not know they were there when I got on the train (it was stated in the situation), and when I did discover they were there it was already too late. You say I could switch tracks, but I already knew from before I get on the train the man was there, therefore I am conciously deciding to kill the man, whereas when I first got on the train I was not concious or aware of the fact that getting on the train is causing them to die.

And that is perhaps even more so key to the debate. When I am getting on the train, and starting the train (therefore condemning them to death), I was no conciously aware that they were on the track and therefore condemning them to die. To the best of my knowledge, they were not supposed to be there.

Now, you could argue this is the same as setting a bomb, not planning to kill someone, but someone was there and you killed them. No, because in setting the bomb you understand that things will be destroyed. When getting on the train, I am not (nor should I be) expecting people to die.

No, this is not being ignorant, because no one would have known they were on the track. So, we can assume that before I left the station, they were not on the track, and that when I reached that point, they happened to be there (though this isn't stated, you can interpret the question as meaning this, since your superiors alerted you to the fact a man was on the other track. Had they known, they surely would have alerted you to the other man as well).

In crystalization, if I am guilty of murder when 15 men are on the track, I should also be guilty of murder when 1 person is on the track. If, by letting the 1 die when there is only 1 it is allowing fate to happen (as you say), then it should hold the same when there are 15 people.

And the rest of my post is reasons why that is so.

I believe that our discussion on the train has had its limelight. I think that it is time to work something else in. But first, let me clarify what I mean.

If you have the opportunity to prevent a person(s) from dying and you do not take that opportunity then it is as good as murder. If you consciously make a decision that you know will kill people then it is murder. Thusly, there is no way to escape it. For the train question no matter what you do you will murder people. As for the one person on each track...well, there isn't anyway to possibly judge that situation. There is no way to prevent a greater tragedy, no way to judge which would be less evil. So there is nothing you can do. All you can do is murder a person. Thusly, I don't do anything, they're on the tracks and there is no way that I can avoid killing one of them.

Lets get something else to discuss before this becomes an arguement, albeit a civilized one.

i still have the question about th birds thing...
(the thread title i mean)
pheonix come on... is it from gate keepers 21?

No...I came up with it myself.

Sicne we're all tired of the train (hell, I'm tired of the train), we'll get to a more uplifting subject.

What should be the basis for a marraige, and why?