• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Which is liable to be the more corrupting and why?

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Of Invisibility and Immortality which would be liable to be the most corrupting and why? Presume by immortality is also meant eternal youth and vitality as opposed to an unnatural longevity or aging process.
 

The Cat

Just a Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,552
Why do they need to be corrupting at all?:unsure:
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Why do they need to be corrupting at all?:unsure:

Well, that is of course a legit response to the question posed, although most philosophers have considered that either would be corrupting, either instantly (usually invisibility) or eventually (usually immortality) but not many have seen them as source of virtue.
 

The Cat

Just a Cat who hangs out at the Crossroads
Staff member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
23,552
Well, that is of course a legit response to the question posed, although most philosophers have considered that either would be corrupting, either instantly (usually invisibility) or eventually (usually immortality) but not many have seen them as source of virtue.

I suspect many look for any excuse for any gift to be potentially corrupting I often suspect this is more indicative of something on them than the rest of us, however there's also a reason horror movies resonate with us so I could be digressing 🤔 Most of the ways I think of having invisibility or immortality typically puts me in the position of a naturalist capturing the rarest glimpses of nature man has ever witnessed. Or in the case of immortality keeping a chronicle of humanity through my existence preserving knowedge and teaching it to future generations when it is time. 🤔
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
How is corruption defined here...

Evil, the opposite of the good, as understood generally by most peoples practical reasoning and if you need further clarification then the Kantian harm principle and categorical imperative will do.
 

Mind Maverick

ENTP 8w7 845 Sp/Sx
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
4,785
I would offer an answer, but I don't do well with generalizations. I prefer to deal with specific scenarios / a case by case basis, some example I can sort out by analyzing the detailed information within it. Otherwise, you're just going to get my usual "It depends / it's relative" response.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I suspect many look for any excuse for any gift to be potentially corrupting I often suspect this is more indicative of something on them than the rest of us, however there's also a reason horror movies resonate with us so I could be digressing 🤔 Most of the ways I think of having invisibility or immortality typically puts me in the position of a naturalist capturing the rarest glimpses of nature man has ever witnessed. Or in the case of immortality keeping a chronicle of humanity through my existence preserving knowedge and teaching it to future generations when it is time. 🤔

I think the corruption hypothesized in both is to do with avoiding/evading accountability on the one hand and on the other becoming distant/estranged from others.

In the case of invisibility Plato posited that being unseen resulted in being unaccountable, that is to say that the ultimate or final check on wickedness is the sanction and censure of neighbours, family, the public, others of all descriptions.

This idea has been a feature of every story of invisibility from Plato's time right through to HG Wells and all those hollywood movies. To some extent the "I see you" version of sanction/censure has lasted longer than any myth about invisibility, the panopticon, surveillance, early prison reformers all believed that visibility, provided it was constant enough, would reform character and stop crime or deviance from lawful norms.

Immortality, kind of, operates on the same principle, when everyone becomes a "creature of a season" while you live long enough to watch them come and go then, as the Highlander movies and Queen song puts it "Love Must Die", or as the philosophers or psychologists would have "love" the capacity to "relate", any "attachment" or "social instincts and drives".

The immortal is not corrupted as they are unseen or unnoticed and no subject to the sanction or censure of others but simply outlive it and care less about it consequently. They have less of a shared experience with others arising from fearing or expecting death as inevitable.

In the final instance the lack of accountability and estrangement from others will contribute to viewing others as objects, means to ends, not ends in themselves and without intrinsic value (granted this is Kantian ethics rather than practical reason or virtue ethics, ie the only intrinsically happy/satisfying life is the virtuous one).

I do see how either invisibility or immortality should permit individual or social/utilitarian good, the longevitiy allows that chronicling role, you could also accumulate commanding stakes in the economy, finance etc., presumably, its a question as to whether or not this could be a sustainable arrangement or if it would fall prey to the corruption I outlined there. It could be a question of time scales. I'm not sure.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I would offer an answer, but I don't do well with generalizations. I prefer to deal with specific scenarios / a case by case basis, some example I can sort out by analyzing the detailed information within it. Otherwise, you're just going to get my usual "It depends / it's relative" response.

:)

What about universalizations rather than generalizations?

I accept its hard to generalize from experience sometimes, or at least for the purposes of abstract discussion it can be as most people do generalize from their own experience all the time, its a central aspect of social learning theory and part of why people can freeze in crisis situations as the mind is trying to recall or match memories to visual information, ie wing of the plane is on fire, which there may be no memory to serve as reference point for.

Anyway, there are surely universal realities, with little presumption and all things being equal. If there were not medicine and medical prescribing would be impossible.

While there will be exceptions to any rule, they are exceptions, sometimes the exception that proves the rule but it is still possible to decide or infer a rule in the first place surely?
 

Mind Maverick

ENTP 8w7 845 Sp/Sx
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
4,785
:)

What about universalizations rather than generalizations?

I accept its hard to generalize from experience sometimes, or at least for the purposes of abstract discussion it can be as most people do generalize from their own experience all the time, its a central aspect of social learning theory and part of why people can freeze in crisis situations as the mind is trying to recall or match memories to visual information, ie wing of the plane is on fire, which there may be no memory to serve as reference point for.

Anyway, there are surely universal realities, with little presumption and all things being equal. If there were not medicine and medical prescribing would be impossible.

While there will be exceptions to any rule, they are exceptions, sometimes the exception that proves the rule but it is still possible to decide or infer a rule in the first place surely?
Well, I don't know if it's really applicable in this case. Two factors I see are, for example, that a) it depends on the individual(s), and b) it depends on environmental influence somewhat, too.
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
Depends on the situation and individual but that would almost surely be immortality in this case (on the long run). Invisible person still interacts with the environment and therefore he isn't really invisible and still has all the physical weakness. While with immortality ironically can actually be much better in hidding your gift, or you can just openly play the "son of god" card and fight your way through.



In the case I have to take over the world I would obviously take the immortality. Although neither of those two is fundamentally corruptible.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Well, I don't know if it's really applicable in this case. Two factors I see are, for example, that a) it depends on the individual(s), and b) it depends on environmental influence somewhat, too.

I would agree in so far as those things influence character, yes, although whether an individual is "naturally" good or wicked or "conditioned" to be good or wicked, would one or the other of those things prove more or less corrupting?
 

Vendrah

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2017
Messages
1,947
MBTI Type
NP
Enneagram
952
Of Invisibility and Immortality which would be liable to be the most corrupting and why? Presume by immortality is also meant eternal youth and vitality as opposed to an unnatural longevity or aging process.

This is easy: None of them.
People get corrupted by other factors, not by these powers on their own.
However, Immortality without being able to commit suicide is something that might led you crazy in a matter of a thousand years or two, I think. For many people who were unlucky on life, for a lot less time than that.
 

Mind Maverick

ENTP 8w7 845 Sp/Sx
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
4,785
I would agree in so far as those things influence character, yes, although whether an individual is "naturally" good or wicked or "conditioned" to be good or wicked, would one or the other of those things prove more or less corrupting?

Regardless of nature or nurture, corrupt people make corrupt choices regardless of what tools are in their arsenal. People who aren't corrupt would use those tools for uncorrupt things. Neither of those powers would inherently make a kind, caring, and empathetic person into a serial killer or a rapist, for example. Different people would use those powers in different ways.

Nurture could potentially change a person into being less corrupt, too.
 

anticlimatic

Permabanned
Joined
Oct 17, 2013
Messages
3,299
MBTI Type
INTP
I liked this premise until you brought good and evil into it, which are too often relative constructs. I prefer the idea of corruption as "change," of the entropic decaying variety. Either way, I think the answer is the same: immortality. Invisibility (ironically) just assists in making the true self more visible. If people feel like they aren't being watched, they can let the superego down and be more genuine versions of themselves, but that plays on what's already there- it isn't much of a catalyst for actual internal change. Time, however, is a well known catalyst for individual change, so I think that would be a much more significant vector for corruption.

Reminds me of the old RPG Xenogears. It dealt a lot with reincarnation and religion, and if I recall correctly at some point it is discovered that the primary antagonist is actually the protagonist himself from a previous life whose body found a way to keep living for centuries until another reincarnated copy of him came along again. They had interesting conversations.
 
Top