would also stand by and watch a child get beaten to death?

[Wirraway]

...that kids death is nothing to do with me no matter how well you try to twist your words around.

no, let's get the causality down first, then we'll worry about guilt.

you could have intervened, you didn't, the kid died. you're in that chain of causation.

you're not guilty of anything, of course, but don't excuse failing a moral imperative to act with a legal excuse for standing around doing nothing.

 

[Kroiden]

no, let's get the causality down first, then we'll worry about guilt.

you could have intervened, you didn't, the kid died. you're in that chain of causation.

you're not guilty of anything, of course, but don't excuse failing a moral imperative to act with a legal excuse for standing around doing nothing.

There are no moral obligations. If I decide I shouldn't do it, then there are obviously reasons for that. I obviously wouldn't walk away for the sheer sake of it. I wouldn't get involved, no matter what. That is just how it is, and there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Wirraway]

There are no moral obligations. If I decide I shouldn't do it, then there are obviously reasons for that. I obviously wouldn't walk away for the sheer sake of it. I wouldn't get involved, no matter what. That is just how it is, and there is nothing wrong with that.

sure, if you believe your fully formed conscience says to walk away from a child murder without doing anything to intervene, wunnerful.

 

[quatona]

I'm just wondering what your convictions are, in re a child being beaten to death before your eyes.

If you want to stop wondering you may want to start reading my posts in this thread. Oh wait...you have been attacking my convictions over and over again, so you must have read them.
But just in case I forgot to mention it:
I think I have e.g. explained that being non-violent is a core value of mine.

 

[Kroiden]

sure, if you believe your fully formed conscience says to walk away from a child murder without doing anything to intervene, wunnerful.

I would be helpful if you could/would understand peoples minds.

 

[Macx]

I would be helpful if you could/would understand peoples minds.

What country? what city?



Quatona - You say

I think I have e.g. explained that being non-violent is a core value of mine.

. . . and I understand there are pacifists and I understand it takes violent men to give them the freedom to exercise their values. No low blow at all. Either you take responsibility for your safety or other people take responsibility for your safety for you. A kid, a 4 year old cannot take responsibility for their safety in this context. I have read your responses and they seem to vary between doing nothing and doing nothing that would actually help. I can't relate to that, but I am honored to protect your right to pursue that course.

 

[MacFall]

I think I have e.g. explained that being non-violent is a core value of mine.

You have been presented with a case in which less violence will be done overall if you intervene. Would you allow a greater level of violence to occur in order to preserve your core values? If so, then it would appear that you are not opposed to violence in principle, since the exercise of your values fails to prevent its occurrence.

 

[brinny]

If you want to stop wondering you may want to start reading my posts in this thread. Oh wait...you have been attacking my convictions over and over again, so you must have read them.
But just in case I forgot to mention it:
I think I have e.g. explained that being non-violent is a core value of mine.

Have you ever called police?

 

[Wirraway]

If you want to stop wondering you may want to start reading my posts in this thread. Oh wait...you have been attacking my convictions over and over again, so you must have read them.
But just in case I forgot to mention it:
I think I have e.g. explained that being non-violent is a core value of mine.

only a very powerful core value would allow you to stand by, do nothing "violent" against the man hacking your own child apart. bravo.

 

[Wirraway]

I would be helpful if you could/would understand peoples minds.

you've stated your position perfectly. you wouldn't do anything to stop a madman from killing a child. is that about right?

 

[SK'sFriend]

My general feeling concerning the 'would you/wouldn't you' questions are that of suspicion. I believe that if you create for yourself any set principle as to what you would or wouldn't do in a certain situation, you disqualify yourself from the possibility of being led by the Spirit into the proper coarse of action. Just my opinion.

 

[Wirraway]

My general feeling concerning the 'would you/wouldn't you' questions are that of suspicion. I believe that if you create for yourself any set principle as to what you would or wouldn't do in a certain situation, you disqualify yourself from the possibility of being led by the Spirit into the proper coarse of action. Just my opinion.

my principle is to defend a child from a person who would murder him using proportionate force. that's a fully formed conscience. how on earth does that disqualify me from being led by the Spirit?

 

[SK'sFriend]

my principle is to defend a child from a person who would murder him using proportionate force. that's a fully formed conscience. how on earth does that disqualify me from being led by the Spirit?

If you've already decided before hand to trust your own judgment in determining whether a threat is present and the amount of force that may possibly be used, in order to calculate the proportionate amount needed to counteract said threat; how on earth could you have left any room for the Spirit?

 

[Wirraway]

If you've already decided before hand to trust your own judgment in determining whether a threat is present and the amount of force that may possibly be used, in order to calculate the proportionate amount needed to counteract said threat; how on earth could you have left any room for the Spirit?

yeah, pal, I'm going to use my judgment to decide that a guy presently hacking at a child with an ax is a threat and then decide how much force is necessary to save the kid.

what do you plan on doing as the kid is dying?

 

[Macx]

If you've already decided before hand to trust your own judgment in determining whether a threat is present and the amount of force that may possibly be used, in order to calculate the proportionate amount needed to counteract said threat; how on earth could you have left any room for the Spirit?

Compasion is one of the virtues of a servant. Out of compassion for the man beating his girlfriend's 4 yearold to death, I would end his threat quickly and in the most efficient manner at my disposal. How is that not being led by the Spirit? What is the alternative?

To reframe that question, or more accurately to clarify -

Among the maxims on Lord Naoshige's wall there was this one: ''Matters of great concern should be treated lightly.'' Master lttei commented, "Matters of small concern should be treated seriously." Among one's affairs there should not be more than two or three matters of what one could call great concern. If these are deliberated upon during ordinary times, they can be understood. Thinking about things previously and then handling them lightly when the time comes is what this is all about. To face an event anew solve it lightly is difficult if you are not resolved beforehand, and there will always be uncertainty in hitting your mark. However, if the foundation is laid previously, you can think of the saying, "Matters of great concern should be treated lightly," as your own basis for action.

Part of the exercise here, is to engage in thinking about these things during ordinary times. We are faced with the truth that a crime such as this happened, given details, given names and pictures to go with the names, and descriptions of the event. The horror, would be to be frozen into a lack of action, to fail morally, due to the shock of witnessing such a barbaric crime. By practicing response in our minds we can treat this matter of great concern lightly . . . within Lord Naoshige's definition.

 

[SK'sFriend]

yeah, pal, I'm going to use my judgment to decide that a guy presently hacking at a child with an ax is a threat and then decide how much force is necessary to save the kid.

what do you plan on doing as the kid is dying?

You said "who would murder him" not "presently hacking at the child with an ax". The "would" supposes a determination on your part of future intent concerning the other person.

 

[Macx]

4 days of systematic beating took the boys life. Your hypothetical presence in the scene is sometime after the beating & torture has begun and before the child's body finally gave out.

 

[Wirraway]

You said "who would murder him" not "presently hacking at the child with an ax". The "would" supposes a determination on your part of future intent concerning the other person.

the rise of an bloody ax implies a future intent for it to fall on the child's skull. how about that? clear enough for you?

don't play word games with me.

 

[Wirraway]

4 days of systematic beating took the boys life. Your hypothetical presence in the scene is sometime after the beating & torture has begun and before the child's body finally gave out.

he's waiting to be inspired by the Spirit. this may take some time. see if you can extend the beating another three days.

 

[SK'sFriend]

Compasion is one of the virtues of a servant. Out of compassion for the man beating his girlfriend's 4 yearold to death, I would end his threat quickly and in the most efficient manner at my disposal. How is that not being led by the Spirit? What is the alternative?

To reframe that question, or more accurately to clarify -

Part of the exercise here, is to engage in thinking about these things during ordinary times. We are faced with the truth that a crime such as this happened, given details, given names and pictures to go with the names, and descriptions of the event. The horror, would be to be frozen into a lack of action, to fail morally, due to the shock of witnessing such a barbaric crime. By practicing response in our minds we can treat this matter of great concern lightly . . . within Lord Naoshige's definition.

That is an interesting piece of pagan literature that I don't agree with. There is no idea concerning the possibility of divine guidance. On the surface it appears wise, but it is actually making man out to be god. This is not like planning a camping trip and concluding that one ought to pack rain gear.