In the locked "The war has begun!" thread, I said:




To whish Neo Neko replied:




I've thought about it (quite a lot!), and I don't agree.

I think it's wrong to expect (or ask) other people to do things that you wouldn't do yourself.


I use the word "woudn't" rather than "couldn't". There are plenty of things that I can't do (for many different reasons) that I ask and expect other people to do every day. But I think it's wrong to ask someone to do something that you wouldn't do, even if you could.


Whether this is something to follow legalistically, or just to make you think twice about things, I'm not sure. I don't know if this is covered by any of the "accepted" moral teachings out there. It probably comes under "love your neighbour as yourself" or "Do to others as you would have them do to you". I think it's a good principle.



So, coming back to the original discussion - I'm not sure if I would fight, even if I could. I'm not a complete pacifist (or a complete coward) and there are circumstances where I would fight if I could. I'm just not sure that this is one of them.


David.

This is a very good point IMO.

If you follow this thought consinstenly, it's wrong to eat beef if you wouldn't kill a cow or it's wrong to use a toilet if you wouldn't clean it or ...

I think everyone gains profit in some way from something done by someone else he wouldn't do himself all the time, without even knowing or thinking about it.



I think stopping everything "wrong" in this definition wouldn't work and isn't a good idea either. Thinking twice is better - It can cause thankfullness and appreciation.

It's funny you mentioned those, because they were the two things I thought of too.

I think I'd do both. But I wouldn't want to eat the cow I'd killed, or eat beef on the day I'd killed a cow. Nothing moral - I just don't enjoy food as much that I've prepared myself, and seeing it in an even more raw state isn't going to help! As for the toilets - well - there seem to be plenty of people around happy to use toilets and never clean them - you should see some of the houses we rented! or maybe not :x


And I agree - I think "don't expect (or ask) other people to do things that you wouldn't do yourself" is more useful as a way of thinking twice about things than as a rule that you make for yourself and then follow blindly. I doubt the moral sayings of Jesus were meant to be followed blindly either - he seemed to take a dim view of people blindly following laws of the time without thinking what the point was.


right - that's morality and religion covered - is there anyway of tying this into the piracy thread too?


Cheers,
David.

i will send my boss to read this thread

I think Kant's categorical imperative is close to what you're speaking of.

And I agree, I think it's a good principle.

@2B
I never said I would not. Because I would. What I said was....



Which means that since I am a civilian and not a military officer I do not have the same mind set. There is some point in war where no matter who you are you will be scarred shitless. Draws full of brownies. But these people enlisted for the opportunity to do just this. If I were called to serve I would. But not without a serious case of butterflies and nausia. I would be nervous to no end.

Yes Neo, I have no doubt that you would serve if needed.


What I was questioning was the course taken by our (UK) government. Though the majority of people in the UK are still opposed to war, the politicians rightly assumed that, once the war started, we'd all support out troops. Fair enough - but it makes those of us opposed to the war into hypocrites.


I guess we have to reduce our support to "We think you're very brave, and we hope that the war goes well - but we wish you weren't fighting it". That's not much support, is it?


But if the government starts a war which their electorate don't support, what do they expect?

D.

That's why most wars are started by men too old to be on the front. Most/alll of the hawks in
the Bush administration have never been in the "at risk" military. Bush was in National Guard in
an era when they were never deployed overseas. Colin Powell has been speaking in favor at
the UN, but that is his job as mouthpiece.

Despite his "moral conviction" I haven't heard that Bush encouraged his daughters to
join the army to help the cause.

This made me laugh (though I'm sure the point is serious). It's a twist on the Christian thought provoker "What Would Jesus Do?"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/po...hotos/img/9.jpg


D.

P.S. I'm still reading though the categorical imperative link.

And apparently was AWOL for part of his service.

http://www.awolbush.com/



I believe, in fact, that out of the entire US Congress only one Senator has a child serving in the military.

Rob