phuturephunk Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 . . . I was watching the Dead Zone last night while foraying into another dimension of time and space ( ) and a question hit me: . .If you had the ability to tell the future, would you feel morally obligated to tell a person if they were in imminent danger? . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirtyepic18 Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . I was watching the Dead Zone last night while foraying into another dimension of time and space ( ) and a question hit me: . .If you had the ability to tell the future, would you feel morally obligated to tell a person if they were in imminent danger? . . . as opposed to what? setting up a lawn chair and drinking a beer while you watch them get hit by a bus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barvybe Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 no...you'd be spending your whole life running around doing that - there are lots of people in danger every day.now, if it was someone you truly cared about - maybeof course, if you could really tell the future you would probably pick up and go live up in the mountains all alone cause it would be damn annoying otherwise (and the gov't would pick you up of course to help them out with stuff). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somebitch Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 if i like them or dont know them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by dirtyepic18 as opposed to what? setting up a lawn chair and drinking a beer while you watch them get hit by a bus? . . . Well, here's the deal: John Smith (the title character, played by Anthony Michael Hall . . YES, the kid from The Breakfast Club) gets glimpses of POSSIBLE future events by touching people and other inanimate objects . . . Last night, he was involved as a hostage in a bank hold up and kept getting glimpses of various hostages and people dying depending on the choices that people made . . . He, at one point actually foiled a swat team takedown of the hold up because people were gonna end up dead . . . . now, I'm not saying you'll ever find yourself in that situation, but say you met someone on the street and started a conversation, as you went to shake hands, you saw a vision of the person dying tragically in a train accident or something like that . . Now, some would say that it's scripted for something like that to happen and to change that future outcome means completely altering the direction of the future . . . but others would say that you should say something like . . "hey, maybe you should take the bus today. . " or something to that effect . . . Which one would you choose, and why? . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 . . .Another issue . . Would it be more acceptible to save say . . a powerful state senator as opposed to some bum on the street? . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xpander Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 It would probably be moral for you to not shape the world around you based around your own system of morals.I'd suggest you move into the mountains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by xpander It would probably be moral for you to not shape the world around you based around your own system of morals.I'd suggest you move into the mountains. . . . Incorrect . . . According to your logic, it would be impossible for me to be moral while morally shaping the world around me by the standards that are my morals. Again, according to your logic morality is subjective to the person being 'moral' and therefore becomes amoral because morality is just a play on a belief system that the masses think is righteous . . . So therefore any morality is inherantly amoral . . . . but back to the subject at hand: ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION!! . . and stop debating the morality of what I said . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barvybe Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 see...the mountains are def. the way to goseriously, if that happened to you all the time you'd wear gloves. imagine having to deal with that every day? i'm sure at first you would say stuff to people. but then after a while you'd realize that there is no good way to explain to people how you know these things. and then you'd either have to dedicate your life to trying to save people or just move on.btw...as for the morality of affected future events - much less impact if you save joe schmo on the street than a senator or something. personally, i'd try to figure out how to parlay the whole thing into some major lottery winnings and then retire somewhere that i only need to touch people when i want to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycmuzik Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 It would take up too much time.....I possibly wouldnt be able to save everyone even if I tried.....And helping only a few people wouldnt be fair if you ask me.....Its like being asked to play god.....I sure as hell cant do that..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by barvybe see...the mountains are def. the way to goseriously, if that happened to you all the time you'd wear gloves. imagine having to deal with that every day? i'm sure at first you would say stuff to people. but then after a while you'd realize that there is no good way to explain to people how you know these things. and then you'd either have to dedicate your life to trying to save people or just move on.btw...as for the morality of affected future events - much less impact if you save joe schmo on the street than a senator or something. personally, i'd try to figure out how to parlay the whole thing into some major lottery winnings and then retire somewhere that i only need to touch people when i want to . . . yeah, I'd have to agree . . . The mountains would seem mighty appealing if I constantly had to carry the burden of knowing that people will die and there's nothing I can do to save "all" of them . . . . . I like what you're saying about the lottery scheme, I'd be all over that shit . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codica3 Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 I would let them know.. but they'd probally look at me like I'm crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr0ne Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 hahhaha this reminds me of this one show i saw on TV one day. it was about some guy that gets the newspaper a day early so the entire thing is like him running around saving people. i dunno what its called by it was seriously the biggest fucking piece of shit TV i'd seen in a LONG time. :laugh: then i immediately switched channel to one of those spanish variety shows where its basically hot mamas shaking their ass the whole time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by dr0ne hahhaha this reminds me of this one show i saw on TV one day. it was about some guy that gets the newspaper a day early so the entire thing is like him running around saving people. i dunno what its called by it was seriously the biggest fucking piece of shit TV i'd seen in a LONG time. :laugh: then i immediately switched channel to one of those spanish variety shows where its basically hot mamas shaking their ass the whole time. . . I remember that show!! . . It was called Early Edition, or something like that . . . This show is much better, I suggest you check it out . . . . . . .. . . (P.S. . . I was NOT in a hole when I wrote this . . . . ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xpander Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . Incorrect . . . According to your logic, it would be impossible for me to be moral while morally shaping the world around me by the standards that are my morals. Again, according to your logic morality is subjective to the person being 'moral' and therefore becomes amoral because morality is just a play on a belief system that the masses think is righteous . . . So therefore any morality is inherantly amoral . . . . but back to the subject at hand: ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION!! . . and stop debating the morality of what I said . . . Damn, and I was hoping to have some fun with this...you f-in' louse... Of course I'd tell them, but only if the consequence is so devastating that I can't possibly think of any negative consequences.Otherwise, it's a whole 'nother can of worms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
so54 Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 hmmmm well i read that book like 2 years ago and i asked myself that same question. ya know at first i thought i would, but then i saw how it effected his life just trying to do the right thing and warn people and he got totally fucked up, so i'm not sure what i would do. it would definately suck to be put in that situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by xpander Damn, and I was hoping to have some fun with this...you f-in' louse... Of course I'd tell them, but only if the consequence is so devastating that I can't possibly think of any negative consequences.Otherwise, it's a whole 'nother can of worms. . . . There's always gotta be a 'catch' with you eh . . . . . . . . . I'm not even gonna attack that second sentence. . . How could some consequence prove SO catastrophic that it ceases to have negative reactions associated with it? . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
synderella420 Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 I would definitely tell the people I care about what they are in for.... the guilt would be too unbearable if something happened to them and I could have helped the situation...As for people I couldn't give two fucks about...ROT IN HELL FOR ALL I CARE...but then again karmic influence always comes back with a triple influence so hmm..........wouldn't want bad karma kicking me in the ass........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xpander Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . There's always gotta be a 'catch' with you eh . . . . . . . . . I'm not even gonna attack that second sentence. . . How could some consequence prove SO catastrophic that it ceases to have negative reactions associated with it? . . . Space-time continuum boy, I'll kill it! Don't make me kill it!Whoops, that should have read any FURTHER-NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES. As in the events leading from my decision to act would be insignificant compared to any possible negative consequences.Not that that's easy to define, mind you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by xpander Space-time continuum boy, I'll kill it! Don't make me kill it!Whoops, that should have read any FURTHER-NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES. As in the events leading from my decision to act would be insignificant compared to any possible negative consequences.Not that that's easy to define, mind you. . . . Further negative or not, it still smacks in the face of your morality theory above . . . Taking that into account, 'negative' is also a subjective label and therefore cannot be proves inherantly amoral . .. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgmodel Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . I was watching the Dead Zone last night while foraying into another dimension of time and space ( ) and a question hit me: . .If you had the ability to tell the future, would you feel morally obligated to tell a person if they were in imminent danger? . . . yes of course... however id be more inclined to use my power to make money... possibly take advantage of market fluctuations, races, sporting events, possibly even some casino games... but hey if i happend to see someones immiediate future while im doing so, id help them.. .of couse... wouldnt everybody??? but then theres the flipside... if you save someone from danger they might say "hey howd you know that was going to happend" and then think that you were part of it... or if you predict a cataclysmic event, they would at first laugh in your face,then they would say after fact of course, that you were part of the conspiracy etc... so i guess if i could predict the future then i would see that coming so it depends what the future after that event... and that would determine my actions...(does that make sense??? i hope you got it...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xpander Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . Further negative or not, it still smacks in the face of your morality theory above . . . Taking that into account, 'negative' is also a subjective label and therefore cannot be proves inherantly amoral . .. . But not at all! You see, I never actually discounted the significance of subjective morals, only the fact that it has no significant objective value. Therefore, everything that I've thus mentioned is based on a personal subjective moral system. Negative by MY definition, no one elses.Any other questions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by phuturephunk . . . I was watching the Dead Zone last night while foraying into another dimension of time and space ( ) and a question hit me: . .If you had the ability to tell the future, would you feel morally obligated to tell a person if they were in imminent danger? . . . methinks you think too much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phuturephunk Posted August 12 Author Report Share Posted August 12 Originally posted by xpander But not at all! You see, I never actually discounted the significance of subjective morals, only the fact that it has no significant objective value. Therefore, everything that I've thus mentioned is based on a personal subjective moral system. Negative by MY definition, no one elses.Any other questions? . . . but morals do have significant objective value. . They prove to the subject being subjectified that he/she/it can objectively state that there are people indeed subjectifying it to something other than the objective conclusion that it exists . . . . . .Try again kiddo . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tastyt Posted August 12 Report Share Posted August 12 I would think, if you kept getting these flashes of horrible things that were going to happen to people, you would *eventually* have to do something about them. Would you really be able to live with yourself if you had all these negative visions, and time and time again you did nothing about them?Then again, you could always just move to the mountains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.