Hey folks! Long time no talk, eh? Let’s chat. Alright you know the drill: Answer it however way you feel. Paragraphs, sentences, one word answers, all are accepted. Question: Does having apathy towards certain situations indicate evilness or corruptness in a person? Can you genuinely be a good person and retain your neutrality in problematic situations? Say you witnessed a person stealing something and decided not to intervene, would you then consider yourself corrupt or simply a person avoiding calamity? Why or Why not? ~ Cheers!
It would depend upon the situation because there are always extenuating circumstances that are involved when anything happens. Let us look at your example of seeing someone steal something. What if the robber had a gun and you didn't? What if the robber had a hostage and threatened to kill them? What if the robber only stole a loaf of bread and you saw they looked homeless and starving? What if the cameras were watching the robber and you knew that it would show everyone who was robbing the place? What if you were 75 years old and the robber was a well built 6 ft tall man? What if the robber had an accompliceand was watching you? So you see there are many circumstances that can come into action when any situation develops so it is very hard to tell what you should do.
I'm reminded of a story told by George Foreman who apparently needed to be told that mugging was illegal when he was young. By way of contrast, George today is one of the kindest, gentlest souls you could ever meet. Since hearing this story, I decided it might be a better approach to tell them first. If no one ever told them, how else would they know? Contrast that story with what is happening lately with police and young black people.
Morality is a set of principles, which were designed to maximize a team. Morality does not maximize the individual, because it is designed for the team. Like in sports, someone might want to play the entire game, but the coach may take them out, and use a substitute. This may not be best for that person's ego or will, but it may be what is best for the team. Morality often requires we substitute our own personal desires, for the good of the team. Thou shall not steal, is a team rule that asks us to take one for the team, but it may not optimize someone who finds it easier to acquire money this way. The idea of relative morality, is connected to the assumption, there are no such thing as objective principles that can optimize the human team. Or coaching the human team is random and subjective. If this is case, that means we can ignore the coach and everyone can play as they see fit, since that too is random and subjective. Relative morality is the heart of the problem that you bring up. Someone had to tell George Foreman, he was part of the team of man, and that his team needed him to follow the coach, so the team can win. He assumed relative morality, and therefore no team, just me; I am the team. Liberalism got rid of the larger team; melting pot, in favor of smaller and smaller diversity teams, which extrapolates to the individual, as his own team. One is not obliged to play under the rules of other coaches. If you are your own team, than whatever optimizes you, is your own private relative morality. This might include murder, if that allows you to score. Those who belong the human team, realize this large team can only win, if all agree to follow the objective rules of the coach, who tries to integrate the team with logic and experience. This which might require you sit on the bench, at times when you want to be on the floor, scoring. If all are willing to do that, the team can become a champion, where all are lifted to a higher level. It is important to understand morality was designed to optimize the team, not the individual. There are objective ways to do this. Relative morality is subjective to the needs of the individual, at the expense of the team. This assures the human team fails and ends in the basement of the league; decline of America due to liberalism. All the sub-teams with the dual standards of subjective morality is like cliques at schools, cheating the team.
