User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Please define...

  1. #11
    Banned Array
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    6w7 sp/so


    A collective whole that could consist of either people, other livings things, resources, etc. that takes higher importance over the needs of those fewwe or less in number.

  2. #12
    Lay the coin on my tongue Array SilkRoad's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    6w5 sp/sx


    Unselfishly placing the needs of others ahead of your own, when it is appropriate to do so, which it frequently is.
    Enneagram 6w5 sp/sx


  3. #13
    Artisan Conquerer Array Halla74's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    7w8 sx/so


    My OH My!

    There are some fantastic responses to this, thanks too you all!

    My first recollection of pondering on this topic (OK, I'm about to date myself again) occurred when I was about 8 years old, and "Star Trek II - The Wrath of Khan" was released.
    At the end of the film, Spock, being a Vulcan, goes into the "nuclear reactor" of the ship (in the engineering section, of course) knowing that doing so he will die, but he opens up the top of this canister, and removes some of the "Di-Lithium Crystals" that power the ship from the canister, re-situates them, and then puts the top back on.
    He is very badly exposed to a high amount of nuclear energy, and looks like he aged 80 years in 2 minutes.
    Captain Kirk gets to the room and sees Spock in the chamber, and realizes what he did, and that he had sacrificied his own life, to repair the U.S.S. Enterprise's ability to have full power, and destroy Khan's ship to save the rest of the crew.
    Spock said something to the effect as he was dying and talking to Kirk through the glass of the Di-Lithium Crystal Chamber, something that Kirk had said to Spock before, when they were younger:

    "The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few...or the one."

    Spock knew he was the only Vulcan on the ship, and the only being capable of withstanding tthe radiation exposure required to repair the ship quickly enough to give the crew a chance to fight for their lives, knowing that it would lead to his own demise. Spock sacrificed himself to save the rest of the ship.

    How does this apply in modern terms?

    Well, in the military, everyone is told early on in their enlistment that "Everyone is expendable."
    I guess this means that if a commander of some sort feels that Platoon A must fight to take a well fortified hill, and likely be slaughtered in the course of doing so, in order for Platoon B to achieve some other objective that allows the forces to lose the battle (of the hill) in order to win the war (take down the command of the enemy) then that is what needs to be done, and it will be so, and that is that, and it was for the greater good. Is that a ridiculous over-simplification of this concept? I don't know. I think alot of this is subjective.

    I'd like to fuck with the Kirk/Spock analogy a little bit.
    If any given person were to be put in a situation where all their loved one's were held hostage by some evil person/gang/force/etc., and then given a choice to kill one of two groups of people ("Group A" and "Group B") in order to save their own family, and themselves, which group would they choose to kill?

    It depends, right?!?!?!

    What if "Group A" is a group of 1,000 violent criminals (child molesters, rapists, murderers, etc.) and "Group B" is a group of 20 teenage boys and girls.
    Well, in my book, the many lose to the few here.

    But I suspect most examples in life are not this black and white.
    More common themes wold be a parent trying to save their child from some type of fatal accident, knowing they are likely to perish in the act of doing so.
    The example above is horrible to ponder upon, BUT - the act was voluntary.
    In the other example above ("Group A" vs. "Group B") the act is forced by the hand of a third party for no apparent reason to the individual stricken with the decision of which group to kill.

    The brighter side of me says that the examples we will all encounter to this effect are much, much more simple and less dangerous.
    For instance, I have given half of my sandwich to a co-worker who had no lunch many times before.
    I want my six pack back, and there's no need for them to go hungry and me to remain above 8% bodyfat.

    SO - I am really liking what SilkRoad wrote above right now:

    Quote Originally Posted by SilkRoad
    Unselfishly placing the needs of others ahead of your own, when it is appropriate to do so, which it frequently is.
    This is a nice statement, and I hope that mankind can embrace this conceptually, and in acts/practice, because the temptations of want and self aggrandizement are everywhere, and in so many ways we all have so much, that I feel it good to recognize that, to be happy for what we have, and to share it with those who do not, so that both lives are better when it is all said and done.

    Cheers to all, thank you very much for contributing to this thread, I thoroughly enjoyed reading all of your responses!

    Type Stats:
    MBTI -> (E) 77.14% | (i) 22.86% ; (S) 60% | (n) 40% ; (T) 72.22% | (f) 27.78% ; (P) 51.43% | (j) 48.57%
    BIG 5 -> Extroversion 77% ; Accommodation 60% ; Orderliness 62% ; Emotional Stability 64% ; Open Mindedness 74%

    "If somebody asks your MBTI type on a first date, run". -Donna Cecilia
    "Enneagram is psychological underpinnings. Cognitive Functions are mental reasoning and perceptional processes. -Sanjuro

  4. #14
    boo Array Hawthorne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    7w8 so/sp


    Lord Varys: I did what I did for the good of the realm.

    Petyr Baelish: The realm? Do you know what the realm is?

    It’s the thousand blades of Aegon’s enemies. A story we agree to tell each other over and over till we forget that it’s a lie.

    Lord Varys: But what do we have left once we abandon the lie?

    Chaos. A gaping pit waiting to swallow us all.

    Petyr Baelish: Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder.
    Likes Yamato Nadeshiko liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Define Maturity
    By andante in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 10-22-2015, 12:30 AM
  2. Define Yourself
    By ilikeitlikethat in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-20-2015, 11:06 PM
  3. [Fi] Define Fi for an SP
    By wolfy in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 11-17-2009, 11:19 AM
  4. can someone please define Si for me?
    By Evan in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-15-2008, 12:26 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts