User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 109

  1. #61
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rebeccaB View Post
    I believe that we can do everything we want to as long as we don't harm anyone. The Wiccan Rede is a statement that provides the key moral system in the Neopagan religion of Wicca and certain other related Witchcraft-based faiths. A common form of the Rede is, harm none, do what ye will. Recycling is one of the many activities individuals are asked to do to be able to “go green,” and a few states will even pay for it. Regrettably, that means fraud artists will find a way to scam the system, such as when it comes to California, where recycling fraud is costing millions of dollars per year.
    Many discussions of the Rede focus on the "harm none" aspect - the idea that we must be mindful in all that we do of its effects on others, and on ourselves. We should not overlook, however, the other part, usually stated "do as you will". I will sometimes capitalize Will to emphasize that it doesn't simply mean to go around doing whatever we want day to day.

    I see my will as a very intentional and determined thing. It is not simply the whims of the moment. To do my own will, I must first understand what my will is, which requires basic self-knowledge, and the ability to identify goals and priorities for my life. As such, it is related to my core values, and represents something that will guide my life and focus my efforts - as long as it "harms none".
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  2. #62
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    No. In some cases harming someone may have the optimal results.

    Besides, if you don't make exceptions for unintentional harm or harm by multiple degrees of separation, it would be impossible to adhere to.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #63
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,810

    Default

    No.

    I cannot avoid harming others in some way, whether physical or otherwise. I'm just too inconsiderate.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  4. #64
    climb on Showbread's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Enneagram
    3w2 so/sp
    Posts
    2,332

    Default

    I think pain is an inevitable part of life unfortunately. Sometimes having healthy boundaries in relationships means hurting others. I hate it when this is the case, but it sometimes is. This is definitely a lesson I had to learn the hard way. Sometimes the things we do to avoid hurting others end up hurting everyone more in the long run.

    I am definitely opposed to unnecessary harm though.
    Friends, waffles, work

    "The problem is, when you depend on a substitute for love, you can never get enough" - Louis Cozolino

    3w2 6w7 1w2
    *Gryffindor*


  5. #65
    IRL is not real Cimarron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Posts
    3,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    Yes, "none" very definitely includes the self. It therefore cautions against suicide, subtance abuse, unhealthy lifestyle, and other behaviors that harm oneself in addition to any external harm caused. Self-sacrifice may be justified based on the criterion in my first paragraph, namely whether it brings about greater good (i.e. is the action resulting in least harm).
    But I have to wonder, why should it include the self?
    You can't spell "justice" without ISTJ.

  6. #66
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,594

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cimarron View Post
    But I have to wonder, why should it include the self?
    Why should it not? Each of us is worth protecting from harm and keeping sound and healthy. If someone thinks this attitude is selfish, they need only remember that it is easier to help others and make a positive impact on the world when one's own issues have been addressed.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  7. #67
    Warflower Nijntje's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    CRZY
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,225

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    I adhere to the Do-what-I-think-is-right principle, which is a quasi-casuist approach to morality. My inner book of rules is too complex and convoluted to be synthesized into a handful of simple principles. Nevertheless, it is this book that I follow. But since it is always with me, and since I trust my ability to properly grasp a situation posing a moral decision, I also trust that I can make the right decision in a rather ad-hoc fashion.

    Obviously, there are situations in which harming others is justified.
    my internal philosophy is startlingly similar to Nico's.

    I'd *like* to think that I adhere to a 'harm none' view, in a perfect world where i am a perfect person, however, my own internal moral code is far too complex, convoluted and at time hypocritical to adhere to principles as straightforward and all encompassing as 'harm none'. The problem being the all encompassing nature of it and that fact that i cannot apply my internal morals across all situations where this belief may be employed.

    Terrible things happen to good people every day.
    Consequentially, I am not one of the good people.
    I am one of the terrible things.
    .



    Conclusion: Dinosaurs


  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    I do not do this. In fact, kind of the opposite.

    Mostly because I am a scumbag with little no empathy for others.
    Not gonna rationalize it away--I enjoy it unless it comes back to hinder me in some way.

    It isn't fun anymore when you're held accountable.

    But if I were to rationalize, I would say:
    Hurting people is unavoidable and besides, nothing would get accomplished if we were "too nice" all of the time.

    I'm like, a leader or something, and as a leader I make hard decisions for the good of others.

    Gonna use that someday, especially because I don't mean it.

  9. #69
    Senior Member Zangetshumody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    What is to keep one from forming an image or identity in the world that is harmful? You have no standard here at all to help in choosing one course of action over another. The axiom of harm none (or do the least harm possible) is far from an intellectual framework, though one can certainly discuss it from an intellectual perspective. It is implemented to good effect every day by people of all backgrounds, inclinations, and walks of life.
    You cannot take a worldly account for what is harmful, because that is attributing the self to a subjection and slavery to the world, at least at the level of moral authority.

    There could always be those that attach envy to your achievements and works, but that doesn't mean you have harmed them by pride. The world is full of standards that compete and seek to dominate each other viciously; and therefore it is no surprise that any identity one assumes, when subjected to the judgement of those in the world- are going to be considered as harmful by someone's measure. But rather than vying with these possible competing perspectives with one's own style of vanity comprised of some 'no harm' standard (that would require a shared interpretation that can only function through some form of imposition to be of any enduring convenience), one could instead act decisively according to one's fully fleshed out image that one has of oneself in one's own understanding, upon which the spirit is set free in the liberty that is naturally discerned by one's informed heart of understanding.

    [Supporting points illustrated by questions pertinent to my above argument:{presuming the scriptural account of Jesus life leading up to his death is not false:} was Jesus Christ harmful? Why was he killed? Was he killed for what he did? Or was he killed for what he said because of some ideological convenience to others? Do you think your 'no harm' principle is capable of killing for the cause of ideological supremacy or subsistence?]
    Escape powerful genjitsu by averting your gaze from the eyes.

  10. #70
    metamorphosing Flâneuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    InFP
    Enneagram
    9w1 sp/sx
    Posts
    996

    Default

    I think that actively trying to minimize preventable suffering is a better goal than just passively doing no harm - someone could probably do the least harm to others by living in complete isolation, but what would that achieve? That we should abstain from intentionally harming others as a general rule is a given, but it's not possible in every situation and it's not enough - not doing evil is not the same as doing good.

    Also, although minimizing harm/suffering is an important part of my personal moral code, I view enriching life as being the ultimate goal instead. The goal of minimizing harm usually follows from that, although there are some actions that unavoidably cause pain but are ultimately helpful, such as telling someone a delusion-shattering truth.

Similar Threads

  1. Which basic theory of nations and nationalism do you adhere to?
    By Olm the Water King in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-26-2015, 04:59 PM
  2. do you have to be aware of the trends to be a hipster?
    By prplchknz in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-15-2014, 02:41 PM
  3. Do you care about the "Death of Privacy"?
    By Salomé in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-26-2010, 04:54 PM
  4. [MBTItm] Do You Ever Feel the Pageant of Life Has Poor Storylines?
    By SquirrelTao in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-31-2008, 10:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO