|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 4:18 pm
which would you rather be, moraly correct, or happy? I've come to find that it's hard to be both. here's an example:
you're walking down the street, and you see a clearly impoverished man who asks you for some money. you have twenty dollars in your pocket, and were going to spend it on yourself.
1) give him some money. you may feel you have done the right thing by giving to others. this is in a way, communism/socialism. however, you will not have your twenty dollars.
2) you keep the money. you may feel guilty. he's obviously impoverished for a reason, so letting him die is, in a sense, natural selection. this is closer to capitalism/democracy. however, you will have twenty dollars.
Which seems the better choice? modern society teaches that #1 is the better choice, but modern society is mostly capitalist. if you don't quite understand this, the story of Siddhartha Gautama may help.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 5:17 pm
D: I hated when you did this to me. I chose number one. What's so BAD about wanting to give somebody some cash moneyz?! Jeez...I don't get it.
Like I said: I'd just give him the twenty dollars. Let the poor guy get a happy meal and live another day.
I don't think it should mean that I'm a communist/Socialist just because I wanna be nice. It doesn't mean that I'm questing for everybody to be equal. Trust me, if I had a job, giving twenty dollars to a hobo would not make us equal. I mean, cut the poor guy some slack...he'd probably work if he was able to.
Besides, I could just go back home and get some more money...and if I didn't have an entire $20.00 bill, I'd give the dude half. Babe, it's as simple as just wanting to let the guy know that somebody cares. How does that make one a communist? I don't understand your logic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 6:53 pm
that's exactly how communism works, making everyone equal. itwon't work unless everyone does it, or else someone gets screwed over. also, if you keep hi alive, is'nt that just prolonging his suffering?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:34 pm
personally with that situation if you will I would choose option 2. I wouldn't give him money, why? Because the man could easily get a job somewhere. Yes he might need a phone and address, but if he explains the situation to the job he's applying for, he might get the job. But if he wants the job bad enough he could get one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 1:05 am
Shintanai Which seems the better choice? modern society teaches that #1 is the better choice, but modern society is mostly capitalist. if you don't quite understand this, the story of Siddhartha Gautama may help. The tricky thing about that though is that while a lot of people say that they'd act on that situation, few of them actually do. My choice is one but I wouldn't normally be thinking about it. I'd think about it later and be happy with my choice. Society almost always contradicts itself. It can call for morality when it really thinks of itself. When regarding myself, I don't include society into the mix. I do things without regrets, regardless of what comes next or what society thinks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2007 8:14 pm
I'm going to go with two as what I would actually do as I don't have much money myself. The morally correct thing to do strikes me as give him the money but the smart choice in the game of life would have to be number two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 2:47 am
`Cyanide Jellybean` D: I hated when you did this to me. I chose number one. What's so BAD about wanting to give somebody some cash moneyz?! Jeez...I don't get it.
Like I said: I'd just give him the twenty dollars. Let the poor guy get a happy meal and live another day.
I don't think it should mean that I'm a communist/Socialist just because I wanna be nice. It doesn't mean that I'm questing for everybody to be equal. Trust me, if I had a job, giving twenty dollars to a hobo would not make us equal. I mean, cut the poor guy some slack...he'd probably work if he was able to.
Besides, I could just go back home and get some more money...and if I didn't have an entire $20.00 bill, I'd give the dude half. Babe, it's as simple as just wanting to let the guy know that somebody cares. How does that make one a communist? I don't understand your logic. you don't know what the guy will do with the money! :O I say, buy some food, give him that, and keep the rest of the money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:38 am
You speak as if there isn't a third option...
Someone could do something crazy like, not ignore him, but also not give him a few dollars to delay the seemingly inevitable.
Personally I think it's more logical to try to help him to a proper income that he can live off. Assuming he hasn't already got one, and isn't just blowing it on 'luxuries'. If he was doing this though, I think you should try to give him better priorities. But of course, in some cases you've got to know when to call it quits and acknowledge when it's really not in the person's best interests.
There's different types of happiness. Some people might value happiness gained through truly helping others above happiness gained through pure self indulgence (And some have never tried to help another and assume that self indulgence is the only way happiness can be gained).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sand From The Future(GTD)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sand From The Future(GTD)
|
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 5:44 am
Tsunami Silver Dragon Shintanai Which seems the better choice? modern society teaches that #1 is the better choice, but modern society is mostly capitalist. if you don't quite understand this, the story of Siddhartha Gautama may help. The tricky thing about that though is that while a lot of people say that they'd act on that situation, few of them actually do. My choice is one but I wouldn't normally be thinking about it. I'd think about it later and be happy with my choice. Society almost always contradicts itself. It can call for morality when it really thinks of itself. When regarding myself, I don't include society into the mix. I do things without regrets, regardless of what comes next or what society thinks. Society states what it believes to be the best action. On a whole, it doesn't go around saying that what it does is right. Lots of people don't have a high opinion of themselves (For good reason (They don't do what they truly believe to be right)). It's not a contradiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2007 11:32 am
I'd give him half. Yes, there is a possibility of him/her spending it on booze or whatever, but there is also the possibility he/she will not. If they do choose to spend it on booze, they still need to buy necessities sooner or later. Possibly he/she truly is too lazy to get a job, but looking at my country's employment opportunity vs number of unemployed, there is a good chance that he/she is not. I see it two ways: Either don't give homeless people money in hopes that some will stop spending it on booze and cigerattes (which I find highly unlikely. Physical addictions are still hard to shake off, no matter what class you're in) or start looking for a job, while the ones who really can't get a job and don't spend money on vice go without a few dollars that they need to obtain their basic daily needs; or give them the money. If you happen to run across the first example, even addicts need to eat sometime, and if they are truly too lazy to get a job at this point (which I think is bull) where they must beg quarters from strangers and sleep in a cardboard box plus getting screwed over when they need medical care, I doubt abstaining from giving them a few dollars is going to enlighten them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 11, 2007 2:59 am
I would choose option 1 because giving other people something could make you happy too... depending on what it is and how much it means to you etc etc.
I wouldn't give that guy half of it or anything. Maybe... $5 or something. Yeah, I'm stingy.
Or I could just not notice him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 5:03 am
Shintanai you're walking down the street, and you see a clearly impoverished man who asks you for some money. you have twenty dollars in your pocket, and were going to spend it on yourself. 1) give him some money. you may feel you have done the right thing by giving to others. this is in a way, communism/socialism. however, you will not have your twenty dollars. 2) you keep the money. you may feel guilty. he's obviously impoverished for a reason, so letting him die is, in a sense, natural selection. this is closer to capitalism/democracy. however, you will have twenty dollars. Which seems the better choice? I speak only for myself in saying this, but I would give him some of the money. Not all of it. I would feel guilty if I didn't do something. Even if I have no cash and a homeless person asks for some money, I'll give them all the change in my pockets. If I were down and out, I'd want someone to help me, so I view it as kind of a karma thing, I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 6:04 am
I would ask him what he likes to eat, get him a sandwich or a can of nuts or whatever, then give him the number to a local temp agency. That's what I do for the guys standing near the road holding up signs. The guys who sit in the middle of the sidewalk with cups, I usually ignore them. It's the same dudes year after year, and they look pretty healthy and happy. Panhandling is like a career for them, they don't want a job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 4:39 pm
Yeah.. it's hard to be moraly correct, but isn't that hard to be happy because being happy or not is in your mind.
That's what metaphysics says, and, in the other hand, i take as argument the theories of Anton Lavey's (in who i don't believe at all, but i think he have some interesting points), he tries a hedonist phylosophy and says that you can do ANYTHING you want if that will make you happy, but you have to be responsable of your own consecuences; and he suggest to be like a child, whimsical, fanciful, fussy, and that way you always achieve your goals and get what you want.
It's selfish, but it may result if you really want to be happy yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:37 pm
I agree with the people who say they would not give them the movie but buy them food instead.
But, if for some reason I couldn't get them food, I'm not against giving them a 20. Call me a communist if you will, so be it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
![[[.sheryl.]]'s avatar](https://a1cdn.gaiaonline.com/dress-up/avatar/ava/64/5d/4d8cf0ad635d64_flip.png?t=1211018828_6.00_11)
