Which Is More Imortant?

Daylen said:

When did this scarecrow become the topic?

Click to expand...

uh.

When you said this?

Daylen said:

Spock was a socialist POS. The needs of the many are not going to help themselves at the expense of this one.

Click to expand...

I guess you really don't know this thing is on. And lack the ability to come back from your emotionally charged political statements.

Have a nice Thanksgiving. Hope it's not too socialist by the family pulling together and contributing to the meal and festivities.

HandyHamlet said:

uh.

When you said this?



I guess you really don't know this thing is on. And lack the ability to come back from your emotionally charged political statements.

Have a nice Thanksgiving. Hope it's not too socialist by the family pulling together and contributing to the meal and festivities.

Click to expand...

What thing is on? do you think an internet argument has meaning? You a trekki or something? Have I offended your love of Spock? I addressed a quote, you interjected the act and I take it as an attempted scarecrow.

As far as Thanksgiving, thanks for the thought, but I'm working, too much to do and family is too far away. You enjoy a good one though.

What a large majority of you are not processing is that the best methods to serve the needs of the many are obtained by purposefully, and meaningfully assessing the needs of every single individual.

We (as in "society") use all encompassing terms to try and discuss how we stand on a subject, typically, with little to no deep, rational thought or critical thinking applied.

This is how you end up with a "Republican vs Democratic" party. People think it is easier and, specifically, more "special" to belong to some specific group that you can "generalize" as doing things the way you would like.



A large portion of our society does not like to "think" about any given equation or issue.

The solution is not to answer for them, but to get them to apply themselves, and actually think.

The problem is that the "Needs of the many" types will use this fact as a way to push their agenda. "Let us think for you!" makes it seem so much "easier" to some people. They buy into it, and this gives the statistical numbers needed to push socialistic ideas for example.


Let me remind the Trekkies amongst us that Kirk went back for Spock, endangering a large number of his crew (The many) in doing so. The rescuing of Spock led to many more successful adventures (Hey, the Vulcan can talk to Gracie ok? He was also responsible for the theorem that led to time travel in the Klingon Bird of Prey) that may not have been possible without the individual.

When it comes to life, be Spock. Don't simply put a red shirt on and walk around, doing what you're told. We all know how that ends.

slowfiveoh said:

What a large majority of you are not processing is that the best methods to serve the needs of the many are obtained by purposefully, and meaningfully assessing the needs of every single individual.

We (as in "society") use all encompassing terms to try and discuss how we stand on a subject, typically, with little to no deep, rational thought or critical thinking applied.

This is how you end up with a "Republican vs Democratic" party. People think it is easier and, specifically, more "special" to belong to some specific group that you can "generalize" as doing things the way you would like.



A large portion of our society does not like to "think" about any given equation or issue.

The solution is not to answer for them, but to get them to apply themselves, and actually think.

The problem is that the "Needs of the many" types will use this fact as a way to push their agenda. "Let us think for you!" makes it seem so much "easier" to some people. They buy into it, and this gives the statistical numbers needed to push socialistic ideas for example.


Let me remind the Trekkies amongst us that Kirk went back for Spock, endangering a large number of his crew (The many) in doing so. The rescuing of Spock led to many more successful adventures (Hey, the Vulcan can talk to Gracie ok? He was also responsible for the theorem that led to time travel in the Klingon Bird of Prey) that may not have been possible without the individual.

When it comes to life, be Spock. Don't simply put a red shirt on and walk around, doing what you're told. We all know how that ends.

Click to expand...

I take it you are advocating a classical liberal (what was called liberal in the 1700s not since the 1900s) position? The most people can be the happiest if government leaves them alone because only the individual can know their needs and wants and how to achieve them the best. If so I must agree, though I don't care for looking to Roddenberry's works for hero figures because of the baggage he piled upon it.

SourKraut said:

Of the two choices offered, which do you think is most important, the "Greater Good", or the "Good of the Individual"?

I am sure some will label me selfish, but I am inclined to believe that the good of the individual is of upmost importance. Does anyone disagree? Why?

Thanks- s.K.

Click to expand...

I ASSUme I'm allowed to determine what is best for me, but who gets to decide what is best for the majority? Because in many scenarios I may believe that what is best for me is ALSO best for the majority, but some (perhaps even an ignorant majority) may feel that these will be different things at times. Is it better to let an ignorant majority decide what is best for them or for an educated individual or group decide what is best for the majority? NOW, we're getting somewhere. And no, an equally-ignorant elected group of representatives for the ignorant majority is not the solution.

Daylen said:

I take it you are advocating a classical liberal (what was called liberal in the 1700s not since the 1900s) position? The most people can be the happiest if government leaves them alone because only the individual can know their needs and wants and how to achieve them the best. If so I must agree, though I don't care for looking to Roddenberry's works for hero figures because of the baggage he piled upon it.

Click to expand...

Government exists only as a necessary evil. One of the tasks of this necessary evil is, ironically, the judicial solving of various civil rights cases brought before it. To do this, we look to our enumerated rights.

For the longest time a societal stigma existed, along with various stereotypes, about African-Americans and homosexuals. In some areas of society this still exists, but you will notice as society progresses we are forced to answer the logical questions as opposed to clinging blindly to societal preference. This would not be an issue if we all recognized, and sat down to pontificate, the definition of "individual liberty", without our societally derived, religious, or racial blinders.

When one is born they do not have a lick of prejudice, racial bias, or religious preference. These are all learned behaviors. There is nothing that makes this so obvious as watching a room full of multi-ethnic children play together during the early developmental years.

What I am getting at is that these learned behaviors then become the basis for a large portion of adulthood, and somewhere along the way we either lose, or lose focus of, our capacity for abstract thinking.

For example:

-I am not a Christian. I don't believe in the existence of a God. Yet I can understand that the ability to worship a God, or in a manner one sees fit is not my business unless it causes me physical harm or finds a way to oppress my way of life.

-The color of ones skin has no basis on the worth of life. There is no way a persons color can, in any way, damage my way of life. Therefore subjugating individuals based on color or ethnicity is improper and not steeped in logic in any way.

People need to take a step back, remove their preferentialism, and learn that we all, individually matter, and that none of us are superior to others. It really is liberating.

slowfiveoh said:

It really is liberating.

Click to expand...

You realize of course this is all most will see... confuse the word "liberating" with Liberal, and label you a Trekkie Socialist.

HandyHamlet said:

You realize of course this is all most will see... confuse the word "liberating" with Liberal, and label you a Trekkie Socialist.

Click to expand...

I hate to be picky, but the left co-opted the term Liberal after "Progressive" became a pejorative. Now "Liberal" has become a pejorative and they are re-adopting the word Progressive. Changing the language and culture are just a few of the tricks up their sleeve to undermine western civilization, having failed to co-opt it for themselves.

oak1971 said:

I hate to be picky, but the left co-opted the term Liberal after "Progressive" became a pejorative. Now "Liberal" has become a pejorative and they are re-adopting the word Progressive. Changing the language and culture are just a few of the tricks up their sleeve to undermine western civilization, having failed to co-opt it for themselves.

Click to expand...

You must be a Spock loving Trekkie.

Watch the world burn Trekkie. Watch it burn.

HandyHamlet said:

You must be a Spock loving Trekkie.

Watch the world burn Trekkie. Watch it burn.

Click to expand...

Funny thing about Star Trek is that people still need guns and Utopia hasn't impressed the Romulans much. They must be Republicans.

watch the bustin on the Trek! everything i learned in life i learned from Star Trek

a good one comes to mind:

gangster: hey, what's this? a heater? let's see how it works...

Kirk: dont do that, it could take out the side of the building.

McX said:

watch the bustin on the Trek! everything i learned in life i learned from Star Trek

Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm still looking for a green chick in the mail order bride catalogs.

NSFW: Language!

[video=youtube;vHLJfxfXHBg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHLJfxfXHBg[/video]

HandyHamlet said:

You must be a Spock loving Trekkie.

Watch the world burn Trekkie. Watch it burn.

Click to expand...

Kirk was cool. Picard finally grew a pair of nuts after being turned into a Borg and forced to join the Collective which was really not a Collective at all but the private army of some disembodied bald white bitch. Proving once again the Communism only works well for those at the top. Damn, they had go all conservative just to keep people watching. Who'd have thunk it?

I'd let her be on top. Nothing wrong with kinky chicks. Cate Blanchett was an awesome Dom as the elf Queen in Lord of the Rings. She will let her freak fly as the Borg Queen.

HandyHamlet said:

I'd let her be on top. Nothing wrong with kinky chicks.

Click to expand...

Less work for you that way.

Back to the topic

Of the two choices offered, which do you think is most important, the "Greater Good", or the "Good of the Individual"?

Click to expand...

The Good of the Individual of course. As long as the individual is recognized as being in control of their choices, then sacrificing themselves for the greater good will be a choice made like was made on Flight 93 ... Let's Roll

When the government determines that the Greater Good is more important than the Good of the Individual, then we would have state-sanctioned poverty as demonstrated by Communism/Socialism in USSR, North Korea, or genocide as seen in Angola where the greater good of one faction in pursuit of control of the natural resources has resulted in the murder, rape and mutilation of all other non-faction individuals ... etcetra, etcetra, etcetra.

Under the Greater Good premise, the trick would be to be a member of the elite/top faction that determine what is in the best interest of the masses.

Of course, Spock finally learned that the Needs of the One outweigh the Needs of the Many

Even the biological imperative of the individual to survive has its exceptions. There are numerous examples of various species whose indidividuals sacrifice themselves in order to protect teir young, and there are just as many if not more examples where the older generation will consume the young in order to survive lean times.

As far as we know we are the only species that bothers to agonize over the issue. And for every example you give in favor of one side someone will point out an exception.

If you must have an absolute answer to the question, I'm afraid you are going to need to wait until you can pose the question to the highest authority.

stay safe.

HandyHamlet said:

I'd let her be on top. Nothing wrong with kinky chicks. Cate Blanchett was an awesome Dom as the elf Queen in Lord of the Rings. She will let her freak fly as the Borg Queen.

Click to expand...

Unfit remarks for a forum of this nature.

A good dose of the good old OC.org "self-moderation" is due here.

SourKraut said:

Of the two choices offered, which do you think is most important, the "Greater Good", or the "Good of the Individual"?

I am sure some will label me selfish, but I am inclined to believe that the good of the individual is of upmost importance. Does anyone disagree? Why?

Thanks- s.K.

Click to expand...

Free will trumps both in my humble opinion.

Whether you are infringing upon someone else's will because it's for the 'greater good' or because 'it's what is best for them individually' it is still an intrusion. Tyranny uses whatever excuse is convenient at the time.

And Spock was awesome btw...