Aix Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Random philosophical topics FTW. To the topic title - Agree or disagree? For example, if you could only save one from the following pairs, which would you save? An ordinary citizen or a criminal. A baby or an adult. A baby or a kid/teen. A kid/teen or an adult. An ordinary citizen or a Nobel Prize winner. An ordinary citizen or a philanthropist. An ordinary citizen or someone's who has had a bad life and whose life is finally getting better. Or would you leave it up to luck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agro Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Sarge has my only words on equality. Bringing in, also wise words on combat, cowardice, and sniper rifles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzVIeyAArks "We're all equal as men, except I'm slightly more equal because I'm still alive and you're dead." - Sarge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Colonel Remo Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Some are just more equal than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 I like to think that all lives essentially have the same value, it's just that circumstances lead us to place different peoples lives to have different values. Example in point: People might hate murderers for being well murderers, but the same persons' view might be different if the murderer in question was a relative, most likely disbelief instead. I mean, if you removed all actions and situations and just viewed every person as a blank physical state then everyone's lives would be of equal worth. But because such situations exist, then not all lives are equal on the earth. But the merit of each persons life is dependent on specifically who observes it. An interesting little add on: With this idea, you can actually decide whether to view all lives as being intrinsically worthless, and then positive actions giving them worth, or vice verse. Which I just find kinda neat. But the idea about whether all lives are equal is hard to answer because it depends on an awful lot of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Some are just more equal than others. Said like a true Communist. Good job, comrade. Jokes aside, while in essence each lives are equal, but choices should be made usually, and if I have to choose, I'll pick the younger ones to save. Their life has just began, and compared to adults, they potentially can reach more things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aix Posted March 9, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Said like a true Communist. Good job, comrade. Jokes aside, while in essence each lives are equal, but choices should be made usually, and if I have to choose, I'll pick the younger ones to save. Their life has just began, and compared to adults, they potentially can reach more things. What about between someone who is known to be able to achieve great things and a baby? There's also the foetuses vs baby argument that America loves to have. I suppose I'll answer my stance on it. I dunno about the age ones. Probably children over adults, but between babies and children, I'd have a hard time deciding. Also, while many criminals have circumstances that eventually lead them to commit their crime, I would most definitely not save them if someone else could be saved instead and I would save the philanthropist and the Nobel Prize winner over a normal person because (in this thought experiment) they are all completely equal except for one factor and thus that factor becomes the deciding factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maeriberii Haan Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 They have done their share of deed, as it is something that does not simply disappear upon death. Babies however, have more potential to do more with the rest of their lives. Though, if I can save both, then why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goddamnit names are a pain Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Random philosophical topics FTW. To the topic title - Agree or disagree? For example, if you could only save one from the following pairs, which would you save? An ordinary citizen or a criminal. A baby or an adult. A baby or a kid/teen. A kid/teen or an adult. An ordinary citizen or a Nobel Prize winner. An ordinary citizen or a philanthropist. An ordinary citizen or someone's who has had a bad life and whose life is finally getting better. Or would you leave it up to luck? Assuming I know the person at all? I don't know or pay attention to a lot of people. I'd save em all or die trying. I guess all lives are equal....the exception being most must be more valuable than mine. From a living standpoint I'd save others because they gotta have something to live for or something that makes their existence meaningful. I haven't gotten that yet and I don't see it happening for a while. But picking between people? If their was literally no way around it I would save a family member. Choosing sucks balls though and I would try to save another. I'd always be wrecked with guilt with whoever I picked. I don't care who the person is if it's between me and someone else, I got better places to go than this crappy earth and no one said that they had to die that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shradow Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du2mLuK9edk Say what you will about the dude's philosophies, but I find this speech pretty agreeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Murphy ☆ Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Random philosophical topics FTW. To the topic title - Agree or disagree? For example, if you could only save one from the following pairs, which would you save? An ordinary citizen or a criminal. A baby or an adult. A baby or a kid/teen. A kid/teen or an adult. An ordinary citizen or a Nobel Prize winner. An ordinary citizen or a philanthropist. An ordinary citizen or someone's who has had a bad life and whose life is finally getting better. Or would you leave it up to luck? I'd save the Criminal (For the heck of it) Adult Kid/teen Kid/teen Ordinary Citizen Ordinary Citizen Ordinary Citizen I'd only save the Ordinary Citizen because their lives are boring and being saved by someone is probably the most exciting thing that will ever happen in their life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugendramon Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 I'd do the impossible. See the invisible. Row row fight the power. Save both of them. Otherwise? The lightest in each case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 As someone who is quite religious, I take human equality as a rather firm ideal. Still, given the choice I'd probably panic and let both die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugendramon Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Still, given the choice I'd probably panic and let both die. This is however implying the situation is a sudden death deal. It could be more of an arbitrary, non-immediate decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shradow Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 This is however implying the situation is a sudden death deal. It could be more of an arbitrary, non-immediate decision. Aw, that'd be kinda lame. I imagined it as a sort of "both are hanging from a cliff and you only have the strength to save one" sort of deal. Much more exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 [spoiler=On the equality matter] [/spoiler] Rather than judging their fairly more acceptable traits, we all are very selfish and will first try to save who we personally care about the most, which doesn't mean you necessarily have to be close to your choice target because if you have reasons to save an ordinary citizen over someone close to you that you know is a serial murder or something, it's obvious why. Other than that, if I had to save someone between two complete strangers, it's not like I had the choice to save both so I'll just do what I can regardless of positive traits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enrise Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 I feel like this goes here. . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WibmcsEGLKo It relates to the subject somewhat, albeit not entirely. Justice > Equality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 I feel like this goes here. . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WibmcsEGLKo It relates to the subject somewhat, albeit not entirely. Justice > Equality Just wanted to mention a funny FAQ about that one. It's said that Hitler actually watched the movie, and upon finishing it he demanded watching it again. Even though his opinion on it is not known, the fact he asked for it again means he might have liked it, which is ironic with how the mustache seems to be parodying him, and have opposite views to him at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goddamnit names are a pain Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 [spoiler=On the equality matter] [/spoiler] Rather than judging their fairly more acceptable traits, we all are very selfish and will first try to save who we personally care about the most, which doesn't mean you necessarily have to be close to your choice target because if you have reasons to save an ordinary citizen over someone close to you that you know is a serial murder or something, it's obvious why. Other than that, if I had to save someone between two complete strangers, it's not like I had the choice to save both so I'll just do what I can regardless of positive traits. I like what said. =D Reminds me of how my teachers said "fair isn't always equal and equal isn't always fair..." they mean two different things, they really do. It's like one of our school mottos. Oh yeah....on the whole "if they were for some stupid reason hanging by a cliff" Stomp on their hands, and then jump off with them. It's fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Flyer - Sakura Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Random philosophical topics FTW. To the topic title - Agree or disagree? For example, if you could only save one from the following pairs, which would you save? An ordinary citizen or a criminal. A baby or an adult. A baby or a kid/teen. A kid/teen or an adult. An ordinary citizen or a Nobel Prize winner. An ordinary citizen or a philanthropist. An ordinary citizen or someone's who has had a bad life and whose life is finally getting better. Or would you leave it up to luck? 1. Ordinary citizen. Depending on what the criminal did to get into prison, however, could go either way. 2. Depends. To be honest, I really can't stand babies b/c they cry a lot and at times, it gets annoying [especially in public places]; despite them being the future to our survival. 3. Depends, though most cases I'll take the kid/teen (preferably the latter b/c at this point in time, they should have some sense of maturity b/c mid/high school isn't all roses/peaches). If said kid is really annoying (i.e. some 5-year old from a certain PBS show or Yuma/Kotori at times), then save the baby. Hopefully the baby hasn't yet been corrupted yet by its parents or surroundings. 4. Depends. Not saving a crack addict though or anyone mentally challenged (I don't have any relatives who are, however) 5. Really depends. If the prize winner is somewhat of a jerk and gets high headed b/c he was awarded a prize (which I haven't heard of), then ordinary citizen. 6. Depends 7. Probably the latter option, just to be nice. --- In some cases, let fate decide who should live and who gets sent to the next world. Otherwise, I guess preference on older kids/teenagers and basically people who are normal/aren't a burden to deal with. (Guess this is why I'm introverted/have few friends IRL) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bahamut - Envoy of the End Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Interesting question, but not answering. Because you know... there's who we'd say we'd save, and then there's who we'd actually save. Which is like Mugen said; whoever is in a position least endangering to our own health to do so and easier to carry. (And that's if, situation given, you don't just freeze and let them both die during your panicky indecision) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Colonel Remo Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du2mLuK9edk Say what you will about the dude's philosophies, but I find this speech pretty agreeable. >the dub nope.jpg I don't have shit taste sorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugendramon Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 >the dub nope.jpg I don't have s*** taste sorry That's not even related to the topic at hand Remo. Sheesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Colonel Remo Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 That's not even related to the topic at hand Remo. Sheesus. Alright fine If any of the people involved in the scenario Aix created happened to like dub over sub, I would gladly facilitate in pushing them off the cliff/in front of a moving trolley/etc. for an early demise. Also I would pick the youngest given that it just gives me more time to knock it into their heads that only people with the shittiest of tastes in anime could possibly find dub to be any sort of good consistently. And if both happen to like dub, I'll just remove both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fusion X. Denver Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 only people with the shittiest of tastes in anime could possibly find dub to be any sort of good consistently. Not all dubs are bad. Code Geass is one of those I consider to have a good dub as well. TTGL, DBZ, DRRR and Baccano, Angel Beats, Clannad, HOTD, and Welcome to the NHK are some of the shows I can think of at the top of my head that had pretty good dubs. I never saw it myself, but I heard High School DxD had fun with their dub since they knew exactly what kind of show they were in and messed with that. One of the cool things I found with HOTD's dub is that they were able to work in pop culture references like Sarah Palin and other stuff that Americans would actually be able to get. It's fine to have a preference, but attacking people for having different opinions ain't cool dood. But I digress. Random philosophical topics FTW. To the topic title - Agree or disagree? For example, if you could only save one from the following pairs, which would you save? An ordinary citizen or a criminal. Ordinary citizen, unless the crime was something minimal like smoking weed or something trivial. Then it'd be harder. A baby or an adult. Baby A baby or a kid/teen. I don't actually know for this one. A kid/teen or an adult. The kid. An ordinary citizen or a Nobel Prize winner. Nobel Prize winner. An ordinary citizen or a philanthropist. Philanthropist I guess? An ordinary citizen or someone's who has had a bad life and whose life is finally getting better. I can't say here either. Or would you leave it up to luck? Honestly, I always obsess over these what-if scenarios more seriously than others and I'm never satisfied with the conclusion. I'd hope nobody would in this situation since dictating who'll die would hopefully be a horrifying prospect. In this type of decision-making, I'd probably gravitate more towards saving younger lives since they haven't been able to live as long and they hold potential. But otherwise, it'll be completely gray areas for me to navigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shradow Posted March 13, 2014 Report Share Posted March 13, 2014 FUNimation and the company that dubbed Code Geass (I can never remember its name, I know Bandai Entertainment distributed it in Ameica, not sure if they did the dub themselves though) are good at dubs, and if you flat out think all dubs are bad, you're just a terribly biased a****** weaboo. I myself prefer CG's sub, because Norio Wakamoto as the emperor, but I figured most people here would prefer to hear things in their own language since the topic is something not dealing with language choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.