OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
Omega, I have an idea. Why don't you just write down in a post what your basic fundamental beliefs are? Don't argue any points, quote anybody, or make any counterpoints. Just write down your code of ethics and why you follow them and then we can figure out where we disagree?
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Don't argue any points, quote anybody, or make any counterpoints.
Good luck with that. We've been trying to get him to do that forever.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
posted
Technically, Omega's punctuation makes his sentences mean what he says. However, he needs to work on his word order if he wants people to understand...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
From what I've gathered, compensating for grammatical mistakes, this is Omega's opinion on killing, murder, etc.( Just trying to clarify, you can correct me if I'm wrong, Omega).
Killing a person is the physical act of terminating a person, where no ethical connotations are intended. Murder is a subset of Killing, where ethical connotations are intended. Murder is always wrong, as per Omega's version of the Ten Commandments, "Thou shalt not murder", and by definition as the wrongful taking of another's life. Killing, being a superset of Murder, therefore, need not always be wrong, just when the Killing is classified as a Murder.
So what it boils down to is this: Killing is not always wrong. Murder is always wrong.
This is just what Omega's beliefs appear, to me , to be. I'll just point out that the whole issue of distinguishing between Killing and Murder is, unfortunately, rather subjective.
-------------------- "Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing. To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking: Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!"
posted
That looks acceptable. I reserve the right to modify it if necessary, though I would give full explaination.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
That's always been my interpretation of Omega's beliefs on the subject are. Of course, it would be nice if he could write it like that instead of requiring ten English majors to diagram a sentence which makes no grammatical sense.
And I notice Rob never came to your defense on this one.
posted
Rob's been dealing with a potential change in job and the fact that his gf had two 'mystery seizures.' I have a life that can take me away from the puter for days at a time, believe it or not...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
killing being a superset to murder sounds good to me. you here people say the had to KILL in self defense. no one says he MURDERED in self defense. that just sounds contradictory. jeez. i love it when people get into huge discusions on morality and ethics.
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
posted
Murder is most definitely a subset of killing, and certainly not the only one.
Murder is unnecessary killing. The problem then becomes defining what is 'necessary' and what is not.
The death of a human being is not in and of itself an 'evil' act... or have we now declared sharks and tigers (and hurricanes and fires and other natural disasters) to be thinking beings capable of evil?
Killing in self-defense or defense of others' lives is generally considered justifiable, in more or less extreme circumstances depending upon the viewpoint of the person asked.
Killing in defense of property is sometimes considered justifiable, depending upon local politics. Some see it as an extension of the defense of self. Some would just see it as weeding. I find it so, but others may not.
Killing for a political or religious purpose is generally not considered justifiable, except by those doing the killing. War is an enrirely different matter.
And there are other circumstances. Remember that episode where the only way for Troi to pass the final bridge command test was to order holoGeordi to his probable death? That's because to save more lives, something like that might be necessary.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Yes, I understand all of that. That's not what Omega wants your ruling on.
quote:Because it's murder, which is wrong, under certain circumstances, but not under others.
Does that paragraph make any sense? As I see it, Omega is saying that murder is wrong unless it's not. If he'd said, "killing is wrong, under certain circumstances, but not under others", he'd be okay. However, since murder is by definition illegal, how can it be okay?
I'd have to say that the sentence is totally fragged. (Yo, dude! Your participle's dangling out!)
*removes B.A. Hat*
The rest stands.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Printer-friendly view of this topic
