Views : 306,824
Genre: Education
Date of upload: Jun 15, 2023 ^^
Rating : 4.909 (362/15,479 LTDR)
RYD date created : 2024-05-06T00:16:04.683421Z
See in json
Top Comments of this video!! :3
I would say:
- If it's in your immediate power and no one else can, you must.
- If it's in your immediate power and others can too, you should.
- If it's hard, doubtful, far and/or dangerous, only if you want and are ready for the consequences. (You have a moral obligation to yourself, your family and society first)
We all want to live in a world were people do the right thing, but realistically, not everyone is like that, they are by far the minority.
1.4K |
I'd donate to a charity putting forth an effort to rescue the boy. If he's out in the middle of the ocean, there isn't much I can actually do to help him beyond finding the right people already trying to help him and assisting them in the cause in the best way I can because that's the right thing to do
781 |
For me it's going to boil down to whether or not I have the means to save the boy. If I'm in the presence of someone who needs help and I can, I will do what I can do. Sometimes that's going to mean seeking out others who can do what I can not do. Means and ability are very important. If I try to rescue someone when I do not have the means and ability I could quickly find myself in need of rescuing. Charitable organizations work because it makes it possible for people to pool their resources.
146 |
What seems to be more reasonable and practical action is to give the location of the boy to the competent authorities so they can muster the meanings to help the situation.
By doing so, one is attending to both racional and ethical conduct with no interest in promoting himself or sacrificing his wellbeing. This is a good example of social attitude and also individual consciousness.
62 |
One thing I have noticed about increasingly modern philosophers is the rejection of self-fulfillment for self-fulfillment's sake.
The true answer is "save the boy if you want and are confident you can. If you succeed, you have helped someone, and debating about what that reveals about your nature is pointless."
138 |
I think all of these theories have a poin. The ideal thing to do l believe, is not to rely on just one of these moral principles to do a action, but instead we should follow 2 mindsets and analyse the situation according to them and choose our own path. Each situation is different, and so will the ideal solution
Thinking over all the potential situations that are similar to the story, l find that there are 3 big questions which we most have to worry about: which option needs help more urgently, what are my capacities, and which option will bring the most return? And inside there 3 big questions there is a couple smaller questions that need to be met. Do l have enough resources to help both groups? If so, can l help both at once or do l need to help one at a time? Can l rely on other people's help? Can l solve the problem of the group with most urgency quick enough to help the other? Can the group with less urgency wait long enough for me to finish the other and then bring them help? What is gonna happen with the one l save? Will they just live a average live or will they be raised by someone who will allow them to become an exceptional person? If its the latter, and the someone in question can only help one person, then the option with just one person might give more return than the one with more people.
As you can see, l already made a lot of questions, and yet there is more. And situations like this are relative, each one will have a diferrent answer for at least one of those questions, and therefore, will have to be analysed to determine which one is better. With such a complicated process, and with each one of the 4 theories having a point, l think the right way wouldnt be to do a moral policing of ones decision, but rather, just let it at the hands of the individual with the initiative to do a through-out analysys and decide which action is best. As long has it follows 2 things: he should try to help, and do it with the common good in mind.
82 |
Actually, this clip's breakdown of Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy sounds like Ayn Rand's NOT Nietzsche's.
The way I've interpreted Nietzsche's teachings is: "selfishness" is tossing aside the assumptions thrusted onto you by others. When one becomes a free thinker then empathy and compassion comes naturally. Let me elaborate:
Step 1) Be selfish! Think only of what's in your OWN best interest... ultimately the realisation that what brings you contentment IS in your best interest.
Step 2) To maximise contentment, you must question all social norms and reject those that stand in your path; e.g. our capitalist society's mantra that more money = more happiness. You must seriously contemplate what TRULY brings you contentment. At times you may feel lost or depressed but you must persist!
Step 3) The realization eventually comes that true compassion and charity brings tremendous contentment to yourself as this is the way our brains are simply wired. Note: Sociopaths/Psychopaths (only ~2% of the population) are exceptions to this rule as their brains are simply not wired for empathy.
Hence, we have the conclusion: selfishness makes you a better human being full of charity and compassion.
Nietzsche, felt that those who refuse to accept this fact are intellectual cowards since deep down we know this to be true. Fearing this truth, they come up with wishy-washy arguments like spirituality, the "intrinsic" (that is god's) value of human life and salvation through god's commandments.
Only by being aware of our true nature can one avoid false/shallow charity. Remember how much sympathy Elan Gonzales, the "pleasing to the eye" kid who found himself shipwrecked due to his mom's carelessness, got from Americans. Even though he had (by all accounts) a loving father back in Cuba we couldn't let him go. We were blinded by false charity in the guise of nationalistic-patriotism, "What better charity is there than American Freedom !?!"
Yet, a kid from Haiti, also shipwrecked on US shores (and was indeed an orphan) was promptly deported.
Nietzsche further elaborated that "love" describes many different feelings and motivations. Often what we refer to as love is actually greed in disguise.
87 |
@FractalShoggoth
10 months ago
Obviously the solution is to challenge the boy to honorable naval combat.
5.1K |