Solf J Kimblee (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
explosivecombat) wrote2014-03-03 03:21 pm
explosivecombat) wrote2014-03-03 03:21 pm
Entry tags:
- !ic,
- *text,
- @carmen sandiego (here she is),
- @chiaki nanami,
- @doll,
- @envy,
- @hiyoko saionji,
- @jimmy two-shoes,
- @joker (black butler),
- @joshua kiryu,
- @kazuichi souda,
- @lancer (fsn),
- @madoka kaname,
- @maka albarn,
- @ryner lute,
- @walter,
- accidental sacrilege all up in this post,
- come at me bro,
- god is dead and my tl;dr has killed him,
- good ideas are clearly relative concepts,
- how edgy of you,
- itp: we discuss god,
- just thought he'd ask,
- like a brick to the face,
- my social skills are flawless,
- professor of fauxlosophy,
- slacking off like hell,
- so fucking flawless,
- surprisingly not plotting anyone's death,
- texting into the void,
- that may have been a bit insensitive,
- that wasn't morbid at all,
- this is gonna suck,
- this is really stupid,
- today we are tranquil for once,
- well that's needlessly sinister,
- why we can't have nice things
031. [Text]
You know, I've realized that whenever I address the network nowadays, I always include some sort of apology for the morbidity of the subject matter; the subject matter is never any better the next time around, which I think just draws the validity of the apology into question by now. Ah, but that's neither here nor there - the subject today is still, however, not any better, so consider the apology this afternoon as genuine as it always is.
[In other words, sorry-not-sorry. Kimblee...]
I would like to discuss morality today, actually - perhaps befittingly, since there are so many morally dubious individuals around as of late.
Assume for a moment that you come across someone in peril; you're in a secluded area, and no one else is around to help this individual but you. The specific sort of peril they're in doesn't matter, but for the sake of argument, assume that it's something that you can handle easily - assume that assisting them won't kill you, and even if the situation you envision is dangerous you can call the authorities for help and that would be considered "assisting" for the sake of this experiment. For whatever reason, the person in peril cannot save themselves; if you don't do anything, the situation will prove fatal for the person you've come across.
No one will know if you help the person or not. You won't be punished or penalized in any way for not helping them - in other words, you have no legal obligation to do so - but if you don't, the person in peril is going to die. You've never met the person before this moment; there's nothing about their appearance or situation that implies that you should consider them an enemy, but they aren't explicitly a friend or an ally either. Just a random stranger that you are given the option of rescuing.
Most would probably agree that rescuing a person in peril like that is the "right" thing to do; I'm sure some would disagree, either because their beliefs are a bit unorthodox or because they want to feel edgy. So my question isn't necessarily what you believe - my question is why. Can you justify it, or are you just operating under "what feels right"?
Answer me anonymously if you'd like; as usual, your identity doesn't necessarily interest me, but your answer does.
[In other words, sorry-not-sorry. Kimblee...]
I would like to discuss morality today, actually - perhaps befittingly, since there are so many morally dubious individuals around as of late.
Assume for a moment that you come across someone in peril; you're in a secluded area, and no one else is around to help this individual but you. The specific sort of peril they're in doesn't matter, but for the sake of argument, assume that it's something that you can handle easily - assume that assisting them won't kill you, and even if the situation you envision is dangerous you can call the authorities for help and that would be considered "assisting" for the sake of this experiment. For whatever reason, the person in peril cannot save themselves; if you don't do anything, the situation will prove fatal for the person you've come across.
No one will know if you help the person or not. You won't be punished or penalized in any way for not helping them - in other words, you have no legal obligation to do so - but if you don't, the person in peril is going to die. You've never met the person before this moment; there's nothing about their appearance or situation that implies that you should consider them an enemy, but they aren't explicitly a friend or an ally either. Just a random stranger that you are given the option of rescuing.
Most would probably agree that rescuing a person in peril like that is the "right" thing to do; I'm sure some would disagree, either because their beliefs are a bit unorthodox or because they want to feel edgy. So my question isn't necessarily what you believe - my question is why. Can you justify it, or are you just operating under "what feels right"?
Answer me anonymously if you'd like; as usual, your identity doesn't necessarily interest me, but your answer does.
[text]
However, that doesn't make your point any less valid; again, I imagine there would be some concern if I did otherwise.
[text]
[It's...honestly not a huge surprise, after that war business. In fact, it makes a whole lot of sense.]
On account of your winning personality, I'm sure. And morbid questions are such a thing back home, why not bring a little of Amestris to Johto?
[And by "morbid questions" he means "wars".]
It's too bad I couldn't make it to your party.
[text]
A bit of a shame, yes, but I rather like planning them - speaking of bringing Amestris to Johto, perhaps I'll celebrate the Promised Day properly here sometime. I don't know if your version of it had such a thing; I won't do it this year because I haven't enough time to prepare, but someday I think I'd like to do something befitting of the anniversary.