Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hal.

Right or Wrong , Brains or Brawn ?

Recommended Posts

Recently crowds of people decided to go shopping in London shopping areas , obviously with no intention of paying and asking for a receipt . So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want , who is right and who is wrong ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
!

Moderator Note

Are you speaking of the riots? If not, what the? If so, looting isn't "shopping" and "who is right and who is wrong" is too vague and not really politics. A political discussion would include things like the rioters' position which have caused them to riot.

As such, moving to the Lounge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want ...

 

You can also earn money using brawn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Lounge , Swansont , can we proceed as follows ?

 

Recently crowds of people decided to go relieve shops of their stock in London shopping areas obviously with no intention of paying and asking for a receipt , contrary to accepted practice in any civilised society . So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want , who is right and who is wrong ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a lot of them have subsequently been arrested. In principle they all would be if they could be identified.

They would all get punished.

The fact that some people commit crimes doesn't directly affect the issues of right and wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Lounge , Swansont , can we proceed as follows ?

 

Recently crowds of people decided to go relieve shops of their stock in London shopping areas obviously with no intention of paying and asking for a receipt , contrary to accepted practice in any civilised society . So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want , who is right and who is wrong ?

 

You still haven't answered the question of whether you are talking about the riots, or some other event that might have not made the front page. If it's the riots, why are you referring to the situation as if they were shoplifters and this was solely about gaining property?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Swansont ,

 

We've had a moving of the thread from politics to the lounge , I've reworded and for the purpose of clarity I will say the following , I'm talking about people who have entered retail establishments for the alleged purpose of Larceny / Burglary , unless you would like to interpret this as rioting , which I would think it isn't . With this in mind , I'll repeat ,

 

Recently crowds of people decided to go relieve shops of their stock in London shopping areas obviously with no intention of paying and asking for a receipt , contrary to accepted practice in any civilised society . So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want , who is right and who is wrong ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recently crowds of people decided to go relieve shops of their stock in London shopping areas obviously with no intention of paying and asking for a receipt , contrary to accepted practice in any civilised society . So , in a world where brains allows people to earn money to pay for goods and brawn allows people to pass this system and take whatever they want , who is right and who is wrong ?

The people who buy and sell goods are right and the people who steal the goods are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm talking about people who have entered retail establishments for the alleged purpose of Larceny / Burglary , unless you would like to interpret this as rioting , which I would think it isn't .

 

They looted, smashed, went armed with chunks of wood and burned buildings. They assaulted and robbed both businesses and individuals. Just out of curiosity, what would they have to do for you to class them as "rioting"?

 

Me? I think that they were rioting and looting, and the water cannon and rubber bullets should have been brought out much sooner. And if that didn't work then on the second day issue live ammo.

Edited by JohnB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They looted, smashed, went armed with chunks of wood and burned buildings. They assaulted and robbed both businesses and individuals. Just out of curiosity, what would they have to do for you to class them as "rioting"?

 

Me? I think that they were rioting and looting, and the water cannon and rubber bullets should have been brought out much sooner. And if that didn't work then on the second day issue live ammo.

Hal is either not referring to these events, as per his previous post, or is being obtuse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a large crowd of individuals, many of them masked and hooded, gathered outside Hal's home, threw bricks through the windows and rampaged through his home stealing anything they could get hold of would he describe them as simply light fingered? Would he have any difficulty in deciding if they were "right or wrong"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The people who buy and sell goods are right and the people who steal the goods are wrong.

 

 

This answer tells me that zapatos has understood the question , is not trying to read between the lines into different meanings that I , Hal , could be imagined to be insinuating , takes the question as he sees it , all in all answers concisely and appropriately to what was asked . An A+ for zapatos !

 

 

They looted, smashed, went armed with chunks of wood and burned buildings. They assaulted and robbed both businesses and individuals. Just out of curiosity, what would they have to do for you to class them as "rioting"?

 

Me? I think that they were rioting and looting, and the water cannon and rubber bullets should have been brought out much sooner. And if that didn't work then on the second day issue live ammo.

 

 

I'd make a distinction of rioting and looting . There could of course be people who would be categorised as doing both , I would tend to see looting as theft where some people who could just be hanging around watching rioting could be taken along by what they see going on and temporarily of stupidity assume it is a free for all .

 

 

Hal is either not referring to these events, as per his previous post, or is being obtuse.

 

 

I'm referring to the taking of goods without paying for them , you do realise that Swansont , you are a smart chap !

 

 

If a large crowd of individuals, many of them masked and hooded, gathered outside Hal's home, threw bricks through the windows and rampaged through his home stealing anything they could get hold of would he describe them as simply light fingered? Would he have any difficulty in deciding if they were "right or wrong"?

 

 

If they didn't ? , .......... , I'd have the happy life I do now ! , .......... , assuming they did ? , .......... , they would be right in their views from their points of view and wrong in mine from my point of view . Would my point of view be widely accepted ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This answer tells me that zapatos has understood the question , is not trying to read between the lines into different meanings that I , Hal , could be imagined to be insinuating , takes the question as he sees it , all in all answers concisely and appropriately to what was asked . An A+ for zapatos !

 

I'm referring to the taking of goods without paying for them , you do realise that Swansont , you are a smart chap !

 

That's a real poser, too. Hmmm. Stealing is wrong. Been stumping mankind for so long, I'm glad we've cleared that up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Stealing is wrong.

 

 

I'm assuming you're saying brawn is wrong Swansont . It would be wrong for any normal acceptable system to behave in that way . What is the underlying issue that makes people do that ? If people had smashed their way into ' Tesco ' and run away with food instead of televisions , would you think this stealing for necessity is wrong ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm assuming you're saying brawn is wrong Swansont . It would be wrong for any normal acceptable system to behave in that way . What is the underlying issue that makes people do that ? If people had smashed their way into ' Tesco ' and run away with food instead of televisions , would you think this stealing for necessity is wrong ?

 

You shouldn't assume I said anything but what I said. Stealing is wrong. Stealing doesn't really boil down to brain vs brawn.

 

 

This has all the nuance of grade-school debate club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If the majority of people acted a certain way, and accepted it as 'right' (i.e. looting/rioting), would it still be 'wrong'?" <-- Is that your question? If so, the answer is relative (as are all subjective judgements). What makes a good Viking (back in the day)? Who was the worst Viking (today)? It's all a matter of values. I value brains, so if you ask me, the insured shopkeepers were right. But yes, the majority does decide what is overall considered to be right in a given frame. The folly in this is often seen in business and politics, most often where they meet.

 

"If a group of people act a certain way (i.e. pillaging/plundering), and suffered nothing they considered 'ill consequences', have they acted 'rightly'?" <-- Could it be this is your question? If so, again, the answer is relative (sorry, dude). The utilitarian or consequentialist would assert that this is enough to judge the action as right. Deontologists and pragmatists, though, would need to know more about what was expected by society or how it would affect society as a whole.

 

"If I went looting and rioting, would my momma kick my arse?" <-- That's the only question you should be worried about. YOU BETTER DAMN WELL BELIEVE SHE WOULD!!! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"If I went looting and rioting, would my momma kick my arse?" <-- That's the only question you should be worried about. YOU BETTER DAMN WELL BELIEVE SHE WOULD!!! :P

 

 

Ask yourself this , Would she only kick your butt if you got caught ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, there seems to be a different viewpoint towards rich young asses going round trashing the place then offering to pay inadequate compensation, while presumably using their social standing to avoid prosecution.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/aug/10/uk-riots-boris-johnson

 

So, it seems the former member of the Oxford Union debating society and current prime minister and his friends don't understand the difference between right and wrong to an extent expected of a grade school debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd make a distinction of rioting and looting . There could of course be people who would be categorised as doing both , I would tend to see looting as theft where some people who could just be hanging around watching rioting could be taken along by what they see going on and temporarily of stupidity assume it is a free for all .

 

The thing is Hal, I don't care. Rioter or looter along for the ride, I don't give a damn. Same actions, same punishment. Stupidity can be a capital offence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ask yourself this , Would she only kick your butt if you got caught ?

 

Are you trying to say it's only wrong if you get caught/punished?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the genocide of WWII wasn't wrong until the allies made their way into Germany and Poland and found the concentration camps... right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you trying to say it's only wrong if you get caught/punished?

So the genocide of WWII wasn't wrong until the allies made their way into Germany and Poland and found the concentration camps... right?

This is the case in utilitarianism/consequentialism. This sort of ethics only accounts for the consequences to the person or group performing the judged action. It could still be considered wrong, from the frame of a whole-of-humanity POV. But to the national socialists or rioters alone, if they suffered less than they got out of it, the action was right and justified. There are situations as well wherein apparently good actions are judged as wrong because of the negative outcome (i.e. the first post here).

 

godwins law in 22 posts - impressive

rofl...At least this was somewhat appropriate....we'll call it reductio ad hitlerium or whatever this time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.