werewolfsfury said:
brom0220 said:
Karma (as I understand it) becomes a physical law of the universe. If you are nice to and do good things for other people, good things happen to you, if you are evil and do bad things to people, bad things happen to you. The rewards/punishments would be proportional to your actions and your reasons for them. This way, people are ALWAYS held accountable for their actions, and NO ONE gets away with unwarranted cruelty. The world would either experience a massive population decrease, or become a better place nearly overnight. This way, bettering yourselves as people would also better your lives, while being terrible people would never work out for you.
but then people wouldn't do good things for the sake of good, they would just be good to avoid punishment.And who/what decides what oos bad and what is good? if I decide not to give 5 buck to a homeless guy will i suddenly lose 5 bucks? or become homeless myself?
Not necessarily the case. Sure, some people would be like that, others would do good simply because they are good people. Sure, there are people who choose not to steal from people or kill people they disagree with because the law would punish them, but there are also people who do neither of these things simply because they do not wish to, or because they would rather engage in a dialog with the people they disagree with to try and persuade them to see their side. Or maybe they just leave people alone because they respect their right to a differing opinion. One could argue that there are people who choose to follow or not to follow various religions for the same reasons. Pretty much every religion I've heard of boils down to some variation of "you will follow these rules or you will burn for eternity" (except maybe Buddhism or some other Eastern religions, my understanding of them is limited, and I haven't found the time to research them properly). And besides, if people are doing good mainly to avoid punishment, the world still becomes a better place for it. Doing good things for the world would be profitable, and just think of how much better life would be if some corporations didn't feel they had to prioritize the most profitable thing to do over the right thing to do.
I mentioned that the rewards/punishments would be proportional to your actions and your reasons for them. This would basically mean that if you do nothing to knowingly harm other people, nothing bad would happen to you. You wouldn't lose five bucks because you didn't give it to a homeless guy, and becoming homeless yourself wouldn't be a fair punishment for simply choosing not to give five bucks to him (unless for some reason you knew that those 5 bucks were what he needed to turn his life around completely and chose not to give it to him anyway simply because you wanted him to suffer). For all I know, you may need that five bucks in order to take the bus to work at the hospital or something.
I thought of this change mainly to combat injustice, because some people get away with doing terrible things scott-free and they shouldn't. I would say that what is good would be decided by society at large, but sometimes society at large can be very stupid. I guess whatever is best for humanity at large, does the most to end suffering, does not cause suffering to others, and betters the condition of the world is what is good. Though you aren't a bad person if you aren't living a life of complete selflessness. I guess my point is as long as you aren't screwing over your fellow man you will be fine, if you help him you will gain something from it, and if you hurt or harm him just for kicks you
will pay for it.
I'm a little tired, so I haven't really thought this through all the way. If you see any ways to improve upon this idea, let me know.