nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

To Die or Not

The Gnome

After much discussion and debate I've found the following question to provoke some interesting answers. To this end I shall put it you humble folk of After Hours.

Would you die for a cause knowing that the actions that resulted in your death would make the world in general a better place for those left behind (loved ones, family, friends etc)?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

The Gnome

InFront wrote:

Im trying to think of anyone whose choice to die has ever benefitted humanity... cant think of one, though surely there must be. Anyone else think of any?

Damn it, good question haven't actually looked. There's my evening gone.

InFront wrote:

I cant wait until the Revolution comes.

Excellent, the seed has been planted...:D

Dragan

The Gnome wrote:

Damn it, good question haven't actually looked. There's my evening gone.

Joan of Arc, to an extent.

L31mr0d

Lothaar wrote:

Doing it because you couldn't live with yourself if you *didn't* is a disgrace, IMO. You're only considering the effect it has upon you.

Like was said, there isn't really any form of unselfishness. You have to have a love for humanity or a family member to give your life for them. If you give your life for someone you hate and wish dead, then that would be unselfishness as you are giving your life for someone who you believe does not deserve it, and in that you are fully thinking about their wants and not your own.

...and of course you are considering the effect it has upon you, it is your life you are dealing with. You weigh up your love for that person in comparison to your love for your own life. If you love that person more than your own life, you will give your own life instead. Not doing so will only effect yourself and your view of your actions. In the end of the day, your loved one will be dead so the only person who you will consider the effects on is yourself.

Its like saying would you live with someone whom you despised but they loved you? No because you wouldn't consider their feelings, you will consider your own, humans are inherently selfish, and no matter how much you try to justify your unselfishness, as soon as you choose to WANT to do something then you are being selfish.

The Gnome wrote:

This is another interesting perspective, can I ask why you'd die but not kill?

simple, there are many things in this world to die for but I believe there is nothing to kill for. No one has the right to take the life of another. Of course there are situations where we believe the death of an individual is justified, but as imperfect humans we would. Anger begets anger. But that is OT and should be the topic of another thread.

Deer

InFront wrote:

Im trying to think of anyone whose choice to die has ever benefitted humanity... cant think of one, though surely there must be. Anyone else think of any?

Well if you believe in Christianity then Jebus. That is if he was real. He thought his dying would benefit humanity. Whether it did or not is up for debate. The Catholic church certainly benefited financially anyway.

Pigman II

InFront wrote:

Im trying to think of anyone whose choice to die has ever benefitted humanity... cant think of one, though surely there must be. Anyone else think of any?

Well Thích Quảng Ðức made a great album cover if nothing else

LovelyHurling

Joan of Arc chose to die

Its Jesus Christ, you morons!!
*But he doesnt exist*
When he takes your arm to lead you into Paradise are you gonna slap him on the wrist?!:D

The Gnome

Dragan wrote:

Joan of Arc, to an extent.

Indeed but she's too small scale as is Jesus but they are both topics for another time.

L31mr0d wrote:

simple, there are many things in this world to die for but I believe there is nothing to kill for. No one has the right to take the life of another. Of course there are situations where we believe the death of an individual is justified, but as imperfect humans we would. Anger begets anger. But that is OT and should be the topic of another thread.

True, I was just wondering.

Deer

Hmmm Gnome. I thought the point was would you die to better humanity. Well if there was such a thing as Jesus then he did die because he thought his death (ie. daddy dearest up above told him and daddy dearest being chief deity one would be inclined to believe him) would change humanity for the better.

Anyways. There isn't one person whose death has bettered humanity. We could shoot down Osama at the thought that his death would lead to the betterment of humanity but another one would pop up. No one person can change the world. Humanity has to be changed. Maybe the world would eventually become a better place if a LARGE amount of people sacrificed themselves be it in an apocolyptic situation, war situation, plague situation etc.

[Deleted User]

TomCo wrote:

Solution - Join the Navy.

What was the name of that US Destroyer that was attacked not too long ago and almost sunk by terriorists? Several Navy personnel died. (The Colb? Cannot remember...). The USA proclaimed that they died saving the world from terrorism?

What was the name of that US Nuclear Submarine on a training mission that sunk with all hands? USS Thresher? The USA claimed that they died saving the world from the threats of a take-over by the USSR (CCCP) and Communism?

I believe that US Senator John Kerry (Defeated by Bush) was on officer on a Navy patol boat during the Viet Nam War? How many Purple Hearts did he get attempting to save the world from Communism? Three...any of which may have resulted in his death if not treated appropriately in that Southeast Asian environment?

I really doubt that most persons who join the military (or a cause for that matter) really see themselves as the one to die for that cause. Oh, they may say the words, but do they really believe that they personally will be dead? Do they picture themselves dead?

The suicide bombers who die for a cause may be an exception? But do they really believe that they are to die, or rather believe that they are going to a better place, kind of like being transferred to the happy hunting ground? "Choo...choo...Next stop heaven!" :rolleyes:

InFront

Deer wrote:

Maybe the world would eventually become a better place if a LARGE amount of people sacrificed themselves be it in an apocolyptic situation, war situation, plague situation etc.

Youre thinking of Gingers too, aren't you?

Deer

InFront wrote:

Youre thinking of Gingers too, aren't you?

**** I didn't think my gingerism was that apparent;)

The Gnome

Deer wrote:

I thought the point was would you die to better humanity.

It is, sorry if I made it unclear. Converting thousands of .tiff files to .pdf files can dull the senses.

Deer wrote:

Humanity has to be changed. Maybe the world would eventually become a better place if a LARGE amount of people sacrificed themselves be it in an apocolyptic situation, war situation, plague situation etc.

Very true.:)

L31mr0d

Deer wrote:

Well if you believe in Christianity then Jebus. That is if he was real. He thought his dying would benefit humanity. Whether it did or not is up for debate. The Catholic church certainly benefited financially anyway.

The amount of christians (particularly Catholics) that don't actually understand what the meaning of Jesus giving his life is. Jesus didn't die out of an unselfish act, or that his suffering would in some way help mankind. Satan threw down the gauntlet to God that no perfect human would ever remain faithfull to god to the end, which was proven by the only 2 perfect humans (adam and eve) who chose to not be faithful to god. So Jesus' death proved that a perfect human (which jesus was) would stay completely faithful to God, even until death. His death is not only what is significant, but the life he led while he was perfect also. Jesus sacrifice only becomes valid once we gain perfection, and benefit from it. The reason we still live now is thanks to Job, who doesn't seem to mentioned as much, who proved that an imperfect human could remain faithful under everyform of adversity. Only by living an imperfect life like Job and then a perfect life like Jesus is it possible to live forever, its not a matter of Jesus dying then we magically gain everlasting life, all they are is an example of how we are supposed to live to gain perfect life.

When this will happen is for discussion in the Religion / Spirituality section. Regardless, Jesus can't be considered as he was a perfect human, and made his decision as such. Although he did choose to die, as he could of easily stopped it.

EDIT: Sorry edited the above post.

LovelyHurling

L31mr0d wrote:

Satan threw down the gauntlet to God that no perfect human would ever remain faithfull to god to the end, which was proven by the only 2 perfect humans (adam and eve) who chose to not be faithful to god. So Jesus' death proved that a perfect human (which jesus was) would stay completely faithful to God, even until death.

Didnt all the dead babies and children prove that already?

damonjewel

I think that for all people, their existence on earth should at least try and work for a greater good. That should mean that future generations should have it easier etc.

I don't think anyone would purposely die to achieve this (unless you take the extreme case, e.g. suicide bombers and if that opens the other question what have they achieved by their actions?), but would be prepared to take major risks. This could be as a journalist in a war zone or medicin sans frontier vounteer, even a soldier does not enlist to die but to fight/defend. On the other hand you could feel you are working towards the greater good by doing low risk stuff like being pleasant and not being a litterbug

So I think it more depends on how passionate you fell on certain issues, the question could be rephrased as how much risk would you prepared to take for the greater good?

L31mr0d

LovelyHurling wrote:

Didnt all the dead babies and children prove that already?

What the hell is that supposed to mean? It has no relevance to what you quoted? Are you saying somehow that babies and children are perfect and that their deaths are the same as Jesus death? Please elaborate.

aidan24326

Blue_Lagoon wrote:

The suicide bombers who die for a cause may be an exception? But do they really believe that they are to die, or rather believe that they are going to a better place, kind of like being transferred to the happy hunting ground? "Choo...choo...Next stop heaven!" :rolleyes:

As a few posters have hinted at this question is definitely influenced by a person's belief or non-belief in an afterlife. Most of these Muslim suicide bombers die in the belief that they've just purchased a one-way ticket to heaven. With the possibility of a few dozen comely maidens thrown in as a bonus. Which kinda makes the decision a bit easier if you steadfastly believe that to be the case, which many of them do. It is hardly such a big sacrifice to give your life when you believe that you're headed for a blissful existence in paradise. For someone with no belief in such grandiose and IMO delusional notions the decision could be a tad harder to make.

aidan24326

L31mr0d wrote:

Regardless, Jesus can't be considered as he was a perfect human, and made his decision as such. Although he did choose to die, as he could of easily stopped it.

Is it not a shade arrogant to pretend to know such a thing?? How could you possibly?

Deer

Whatever happened to "Jesus died to SAVE us from our sins"? Basically what I'm getting from this is that Christianity is based on a little experiment that God took to get one up on the devil.

This whole topic is very interesting. It is very hard though to place yourself in the mindset whereby your death will change the world for the better. There are really no examples to draw from in history.

I think it would help if we had examples from films, books etc of characters sacrifycing themselves for mankind. I'll throw some in - Independance Day, Armageddon, The Stand by Stephen King. Does anyone else have an example?

LovelyHurling

L31mr0d wrote:

What the hell is that supposed to mean? It has no relevance to what you quoted? Are you saying somehow that babies and children are perfect and that their deaths are the same as Jesus death? Please elaborate.

Firstly... relax.

Secondly: you are suggesting that Jesus' death proved that a perfect human can stay faithful and perfect until the end.

What I am saying is that, yes, babies and children are perfect in the eyes of religion (maybe not yours

) and that those who have died prematurely have remained perfect throughout their lives. It didnt take Jesus to prove that someone could remain completely a child of God until their death.

Since your edit I would also suggest that the follwing is badly thought out, again because of the condition of infants and children:

Only by living an imperfect life like Job and then a perfect life like Jesus is it possible to live forever

Dragan

LovelyHurling wrote:

What I am saying is that, yes, babies and children are perfect in the eyes of religion (maybe not yours ) and that those who have died prematurely have remained perfect throughout their lives. It didnt take Jesus to prove that someone could remain completely a child of God until their death.

Since your edit I would also suggest that the follwing is badly thought out, again because of the condition of infants and children:

Em....hardly, i thought the whole point of Baptism was original sin? Surely a baby or a child that would die before Baptism would be deemed to have be imperfect in the eyes of those who follow that particular religion?

Tbh, i think bringing Jesus into it is a moot point.....there is no actually proof that Jesus existed and did what he did that does not require faith....hence the whole point of religion. As such, you cannot say "Jesus died to save the world"....because he didn't not.....you believe he did, but even then he only died to save those who would embrace his Father, if such a deity even existed.??? No???

L31mr0d

LovelyHurling wrote:

Firstly... relax.

Secondly: you are suggesting that Jesus' death proved that a perfect human can stay faithful and perfect until the end.

What I am saying is that, yes, babies and children are perfect in the eyes of religion (maybe not yours ) and that those who have died prematurely have remained perfect throughout their lives. It didnt take Jesus to prove that someone could remain completely a child of God until their death.

Since your edit I would also suggest that the follwing is badly thought out, again because of the condition of infants and children:

Romans 5:12, look it up. The bible never says babies and children are perfect, I don't know where you misunderstood that from?

Also the bible makes allowance for babies/children/people who never heard of Jesus or the bible teaching, they are known as the unrighteous in the bible as they where never given an opportunity to prove themselves to God (Acts 24:15), this is the whole point of Judgement day, which resurrects the unrighteous to be tested. A lot of people get Judgement day confused with Armageddon. They are two seperate events that happen concurrently.

Dragan wrote:

Tbh, i think bringing Jesus into it is a moot point.....there is no actually proof that Jesus existed and did what he did that does not require faith....hence the whole point of religion. As such, you cannot say "Jesus died to save the world"....because he didn't not.....you believe he did, but even then he only died to save those who would embrace his Father, if such a deity even existed.??? No???

To say Jesus never existed is to ignore the accounts of the Bible, if you can quickly dismiss one writing then why not dismiss them all. To dismiss Jesus is to say the world has lived the last 2000 years on a farce, in fact our calender is the butt of this joke. Should we dismiss every historical writing because you can't verify one aspect of it yet. The bible has been verified as accurate for all the historical events it documents, that can be verified, so why would it be wrong in the ones that can't yet be verified. Sure it requires faith, but what doesn't? There is still alot of holes in the evolutionary theory, yet still alot of people have "faith" that eventually science will fill these holes.

Bodhidharma

No i wouldn't die for anything or anybody. Anyone who says they would is either lying or has a ridiculously large ego. People must have a lot of faith in their selflessness.

People are SELFISH! Its a fact. I wont deny that my own existence is the most important thing for me.

Here is an example. A guy has a gun to your head and says if you dont push this button he will blow your head off. He tells you the button is linked to a bomb which will kill ten starving african children. Now decide!

I can guarantee you would push the button. Death is something people dont like to think about and with good reason. You are finished, the END! It's a much more frightening thought than anything else. Anything is better than that.

Nightwish

**** no. I'm selfish.

Dragan

I don't want to make this overly relgious all of a sudden, if you would like to get indept on anything like that then start a new thread and i will be happy to help.

My whole point was that Jesus only came into this as an object of faith....and even then what he may or may not have done is completely outside the context of the questions. Jesus, if he really did exist, did not die to make the world a better place, he died to allow a degree of redemption for those willing to ask, and acess to heaven.

The question is about changing the face of the earth through your own sacrifice....instantly making everything better for everyone. This did not happen, so i just felt that the example was poor.

I have to admit i also did not like the way that he was brought into conversation. There is no proof that he existed, you operate merely from a point of faith and as such seemed to expect that your answer of "Jesus" would be obvious. Actually, if it wasn;t you who originally brough up Jesus then i apologise and just ignore that bit.

Now then, i would only really like to reply to two of the things you said above. As i said, if you would like to start a religious debate, then please do so in a new thread and i will be happy to discuss things with you!

L31mr0d wrote:

To say Jesus never existed is to ignore the accounts of the Bible

Exactly. I don't believe the words of the bible. Just because the bible exists does not mean i am obligated to believe it. The Koran exists, yes no?

L31mr0d wrote:

To dismiss Jesus is to say the world has lived the last 2000 years on a farce

I am not sure that i see the point of this.....do you mean to say that when Jesus was killed, a nation that did not believe he was the son of god reset the clock based upon his death?

It does not mean the world has lived a farce, it just means that is how the world has measured time. Years pass, they always will. Does it matter if this is 1998 or 2006 as man would measure it? I don't think the earth cares.

Finally, explain dinosaurs. - j/k!!!

Lothaar

L31mr0d wrote:

Like was said, there isn't really any form of unselfishness....

...and of course you are considering the effect it has upon you, it is your life you are dealing with.

I'd like to point out that it was me who said that about unselfishness and that I was taking that point into account.

The key word in the bit you quoted from me was 'only' - you're ONLY thinking of the effect upon yourself. You don't even consider your loved ones, family, blood, etc, when making your decision. If you considered them there would still be some degree of selfishness but at least it would extend across a wider sphere of people. But no - all that matters is that you would feel bad if you let them die.
If that's your motivation then I think it's a disgrace.

Lothaar

Bodhidharma wrote:

Here is an example. A guy has a gun to your head and says if you dont push this button he will blow your head off. He tells you the button is linked to a bomb which will kill ten starving african children. Now decide!

I can guarantee you would push the button.

What if the bomb will kill your family, children and girlfriend/wife? Would you still push it?

It's a different story when you know or care about the people at risk.

Anyway, that's not the issue here. It's about dying to benefit all of humanity - loved ones, family, people you hate and randomers you never met. Not *just* randomers, as in your scenario.

Dragan

Bodhidharma wrote:

I can guarantee you would push the button.

If you can guarantee ANYTHING with regard to human behaviour, particularly under stress, then you are a better man the some of the most skilled human behavioural psychologists on the planet.

There is no way you can guarantee what i would do, or what ANYONE else would do. You can think you know, and you might even be right, but that is not a guarantee.

Maybe i push the button, maybe i don't. Maybe i take the gun off him ( maybe he messed with the wrong man) and maybe i put a bullet in his head. Maybe i make HIM to do the same thing. Maybe i die trying to take the gun off him.

Who knows how i would react, i don't. What makes you think you do?

You can sit there and tell yourself that everyone would do Option B because that is what you would do, and your not happy about it and it's a way to make yourself feel better.

It's called the guilt association. The subject has taken an action, or would take an action that they find to be at odds or unagreeable with the image they have of themselves, so they will project the same flawed action on to everyone else.

You cannot know how YOU would react to that situation , maybe you would do the brave thing and take the bullet? Who knows.

TomCo

Nightwish wrote:

**** no. I'm selfish.

Me too, I got into a fight with one of these 'charity' workers yesterday. He kept telling me how I was wrong, and I kept telling him how his work was dishonest and the whole getting paid and guilt tripping people was morally dubious. I got pissed off and told him, "Listen, I just don't care. You're not getting my bank details and if that makes me a bastard I can live with it."

If anyone hears about a whole bunch of kids dying from something or other, my bad.

The Gnome

Well this has come along nicely in my absence. I have to say that though I expected a lot of vote to the negative I suprised as to how many there actually are. For shame society!

As to the matter of Jesus and this particular question, he does not apply whether whether he is real or fictional as his death didn't change the whole world for the better. Some would probably say he did quite the opposite.

There's also been alot of talk based around a specific scenario which I tried to avoid for that very reason. As Dragan said we are unpredictible creatures and with hundreds if not thousands of options depending on the situation. So try and avoid think about a particular set of events when answering the question!

PS. You're a monster Tomco!