You have to be Evil to be Beneficial

[Naheal]

I'd prefer being the biggest douchebag I possibly could be to every single nation, making myself the largest threat to the world, moving towards tyranny should I have actual power. Once I have full control of a country, I would literally force the country to bend to my will and learn to treat every other human being in a respectful manor. At the end of this, when I feel that this is done, I'll point out that what I was doing is still a wrong means to this end and face my own punishment set up for such a crime.

 

[Da Chi]

Wait a minute ... this sounds alot like Fatalism.

Frankly it that were the case then everybody would just say "Come what may".

Not quite fatalism. Because if you understand the consequences of your actions perfectly you can make the choice to change things, at a cost of course.

 

[HT_Black]

I'd embezzle two hundred quadrillion (it's a real number) dollars, and thus release that much into the ailing US economy, which in turn would bail that country out of the gutter and set it for two Iraq wars to come. Then, to follow up, I'd purposefully endanger and subsequently save the lives of several dozen rich people, and by doing that I would better and then immediately terminate the lives of an equal number of other rich people.

Ok, but to embezzle the money you would first have to take it from all other countries until you have enough. Would you cripple the economies of the rest of the world to save the United States?
And about your second action, how would you decide on the rich people you kill and the rich people you save? What makes one better than another?

A: Actually, all of the theft up to that stage would be self-feeding. By stealing one hundred dollars, I would release one hundred dollars into the economy, and so on and so forth. There would be no noticable economic change until I release my accumulated earnings into the economy, thus dubling its current worth (assuming I steal everything in the United states), at which point I simply begin stealing again. In practice, it would be a like the money simply appeared out of the air and fell into my bank account.

B: I dunno. Just save a bunch of rich people at once and hope the rest get the axe. I'm not really picky about which ones.

 

[zehydra]

I know it's not contributing much... But Amoralism!

Why?

 

[Dr. Whiggs]

If you could do one thing to help the world what would it be?
Could be anything. But one catch is that you have to do something horrible to balance your actions.
Like Karmic Balance.
For every good action you have to do something equally abhorrent. Every life saved, one would be lost. An Eye for an Eye so to speak.

Been watching a lot of Fullmetal Alchemist lately, have we?

That would be a no. I don't watch anime.
Care to contribute?

How about I steal a dollar then drop one on the ground at a later date.

 

[zehydra]

I don't believe in Karma. Sorry.

But, if Karma was a law of nature, then I suppose I'd try to find some way to help people with the least negative effects.

 

[randomsix]

I would be the Antichrist, so my actions would bring about the rapture, but because my actions were bad to begin with, the karmic balance would be additional good.

 

[Da Chi]

This is a good question. But it's not easy to answer.

If I kill a murderer, is that a balanced act in and of itself? After all, I killed someone (evil act), but he was a horrible person, so I saved lives (good act). If I saved multiple lives, would I have to kill more people to make up the balance of the people I saved by killing the murderer? Or is killing a murderer a good act to begin with? So would I have done one good act by killing him, or multiple good acts by killing him and saving people? Or is killing someone evil, regardless of intent?

What's more, who decides who is evil? My moral compass?

I don't think I can answer this question easily.

I don't have all the answers, it's simply an imperfect hypothetical. So let me try and pose a situation for you.
You are faced with killing a murderer. You know he will kill again.

If you kill him, you must kill one innocent person to make up for the life you saved.
If you spare him, whoever he murdered before will live again, but the murderer will also kill again.

There is no easy answer for these types of questions. Sometimes you have to make the harder choice for good. Whatever that means to you.

 

[santacolia]

Erase the memories and all sources of information from the world in order for us to start over without ideologies and give us a fresh chance at unity. Sure new ones would sprout but at least it'd be different. It would erase history, religions and that us vs. them nonsense but at the same time we'd lose a lot of our progress in science and medicine.
Still 1:1 doesn't pay off well enough to do much of anything

 

[Da Chi]

I'd prefer being the biggest douchebag I possibly could be to every single nation, making myself the largest threat to the world, moving towards tyranny should I have actual power. Once I have full control of a country, I would literally force the country to bend to my will and learn to treat every other human being in a respectful manor. At the end of this, when I feel that this is done, I'll point out that what I was doing is still a wrong means to this end and face my own punishment set up for such a crime.

So how would you go about forcing respect between people? Genocide of racists? Death camps for the intolerant? You will create a society with no different ideas or beliefs. One homogeneous mixture.

 

[Da Chi]

If you could do one thing to help the world what would it be?
Could be anything. But one catch is that you have to do something horrible to balance your actions.
Like Karmic Balance.
For every good action you have to do something equally abhorrent. Every life saved, one would be lost. An Eye for an Eye so to speak.

Been watching a lot of Fullmetal Alchemist lately, have we?

That would be a no. I don't watch anime.
Care to contribute?

How about I steal a dollar then drop one on the ground at a later date.

It's a perfect balance. Someone loses and someone gains.

 

[Da Chi]

I would be the Antichrist, so my actions would bring about the rapture, but because my actions were bad to begin with, the karmic balance would be additional good.

So theoretically you're the destruction and salvation for the world?

 

[Naheal]

I'd prefer being the biggest douchebag I possibly could be to every single nation, making myself the largest threat to the world, moving towards tyranny should I have actual power. Once I have full control of a country, I would literally force the country to bend to my will and learn to treat every other human being in a respectful manor. At the end of this, when I feel that this is done, I'll point out that what I was doing is still a wrong means to this end and face my own punishment set up for such a crime.

So how would you go about forcing respect between people? Genocide of racists? Death camps for the intolerant? You will create a society with no different ideas or beliefs. One homogeneous mixture.

Pretty much if anyone shows intolerance at all, they're shipped off to work camps to function as forced labor until they die. Ultimately, I would be doing a very good thing in the long run, but the methods that I'd use to get there would be horrendous. Hate crimes would result in execution on the spot.

My own crimes would technically fall under the category of hate crimes, so you can see where such a retribution would go.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Wait a minute ... this sounds alot like Fatalism.

Frankly it that were the case then everybody would just say "Come what may".

Not quite fatalism. Because if you understand the consequences of your actions perfectly you can make the choice to change things, at a cost of course.

Of course, but given that the ill effect of active choice will be equal to the good thatcomes from it, therefore nobody would try, therefore as people will just accept whatever happens to them.... fatalism.

I mean if you know that a bad thing will come from a good action, thats pretty fatalistic right there o.o Especially with your cancer example n.n

So I reckon everybody would just adopt a fatalistic attitude :x

 

[Naheal]

I would be the Antichrist, so my actions would bring about the rapture, but because my actions were bad to begin with, the karmic balance would be additional good.

So theoretically you're the destruction and salvation for the world?

He's essentially taking a similar approach that I am: obliterate our current society to create something better from it's ashes in the most brutal fashion possible.

 

[Da Chi]

Wait a minute ... this sounds alot like Fatalism.

Frankly it that were the case then everybody would just say "Come what may".

Not quite fatalism. Because if you understand the consequences of your actions perfectly you can make the choice to change things, at a cost of course.

Of course, but given that the ill effect of active choice will be equal to the good thatcomes from it, therefore nobody would try, therefore as people will just accept whatever happens to them.... fatalism.

I mean if you know that a bad thing will come from a good action, thats pretty fatalistic right there o.o Especially with your cancer example n.n

So I reckon everybody would just adopt a fatalistic attitude :x

I disagree. Judging from the people in this forum, while some didn't want to accept their consequences, most decided to take action for what they believe to be the greater good. They don't believe in "what will be will be", they believe in doing what they can, even with the cost.

 

[Whobajube]

Wodan suggested giving everyone pain as both positive and negative karma.

If you were to give everyone in the world a few moments of excruciating pain, or maybe constant minute pain, maybe the equivalent of a slight headache. Doesn't seem THAT evil. Multiply that by over 6 billion? That's a lot of karma built up to do good with.

 

[REAPER5594]

that makes it a bit harder, seeing as I don't really feel. uhhh... fuck. there is nothing equal to the good I would be doing. All I can think about is doing mandatory genetic screenings and I.Q. tests so you can be ALLOWED to procreate. Oh, wait, that would be beneficial too. I can't think of anything.

Ok, so let's go back to my original question to you. If you killed every "dumbass" in the world, and sacrificed one intelligent human being for every "dumbass" you killed, would it be worth it?

well, there are maybe like 1.5 intelligent (or at least average)people per every ignorant person, so we should still have a viable breeding population afterwards, so, sure why not.

 

[Da Chi]

Wodan suggested giving everyone pain as both positive and negative karma.

If you were to give everyone in the world a few moments of excruciating pain, or maybe constant minute pain, maybe the equivalent of a slight headache. Doesn't seem THAT evil. Multiply that by over 6 billion? That's a lot of karma built up to do good with.

He said he would give people eternal life with the pain.
Live forever with the pain no matter the magnitude. Some people couldn't handle it though. Endless, non-stop pain. forever. Doesn't sound very appealing to me.