IncendiaryDevice
Self-Ejected
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2014
- Messages
- 7,407
And another thing...
"What does one life matter" is also a terrible tag-line compared to "What can change the nature of a man".
We are constantly surrounded by examples of how one life can matter, from hiring a good football player to boost a football team's league position to scientists/inventors who come up with things that revolutionise society. Even from a philosophical perspective, it's patently obvious that people consider that their close friends and/or family and/or pet or whatever are lives that 'matter' more than people we've never met. You could argue its a 'question' that has already been answered, in that murder is, almost universally, considered a last resort scenario, or, at least, something that is best not practiced without reason, even in the more psychotic phases of history. If you hear someone utter "what does one life matter", it, almost invariably, means that person is trying to 'excuse' some act that they know is potentially amoral. It's a question that is too loaded from a moral perspective from the outset.
However, the question "what can change the nature of a man" is uniquely ambiguous. While appearing to be loaded from a moral perspective, it is, in fact, so inherently deep that it transcends morals. It's a question that is and always has been unsolved and the further one examines the question the less one is able to answer it coherently. It's like a different tier of complexity, because while all men can conceptualise why one life might matter, no man can fully conceptualise why they need to change their nature, nor in what way, nor even which parts of their nature are even of merit to change.
Again, right from the point of conception, someone should have said "What does one life matter? Sounds a bit cliche and trite to me, can't we come up with something a bit better than that?"
"What does one life matter" is also a terrible tag-line compared to "What can change the nature of a man".
We are constantly surrounded by examples of how one life can matter, from hiring a good football player to boost a football team's league position to scientists/inventors who come up with things that revolutionise society. Even from a philosophical perspective, it's patently obvious that people consider that their close friends and/or family and/or pet or whatever are lives that 'matter' more than people we've never met. You could argue its a 'question' that has already been answered, in that murder is, almost universally, considered a last resort scenario, or, at least, something that is best not practiced without reason, even in the more psychotic phases of history. If you hear someone utter "what does one life matter", it, almost invariably, means that person is trying to 'excuse' some act that they know is potentially amoral. It's a question that is too loaded from a moral perspective from the outset.
However, the question "what can change the nature of a man" is uniquely ambiguous. While appearing to be loaded from a moral perspective, it is, in fact, so inherently deep that it transcends morals. It's a question that is and always has been unsolved and the further one examines the question the less one is able to answer it coherently. It's like a different tier of complexity, because while all men can conceptualise why one life might matter, no man can fully conceptualise why they need to change their nature, nor in what way, nor even which parts of their nature are even of merit to change.
Again, right from the point of conception, someone should have said "What does one life matter? Sounds a bit cliche and trite to me, can't we come up with something a bit better than that?"
