Freedom of will versus the prevention of atrocities

[kajarainbow]

If you had a method of making people nice, or at least making them not do the really terrible things that happen everyday (carnage and suffering around the world), is it morally acceptable to preemptively use it on everyone and sundry? Is it okay to use it only on proven offenders?

Does the inviolability of their psyches outweigh making the human race far better off?

Comments

[kajarainbow.livejournal.com]

I don't know. When I see another person suffering, and feel their pain, sometimes there's that fear you speak of, yes (I feel it when I hear about instances of transphobia for example). But not always. Sometimes I just don't want them to suffer. There's not much logical explanation for that, it's just something I feel. I don't know. The argument that people ultimately don't really give a shit baffles me. If that selfish fear's a strong element as you argue, why do people even give their lives for others?

I dunno. When I see people making those sorts of statements, sometimes it seems like they're generalizing from their own feelings. That doesn't mean that it doesn't hold true for a lot of people (and I'm sure what you say holds true for many people). But, well.

Well, yeah, generalized fixes would have to be the order. But if I ended up with that kind of power, I'd just do what I said in my response to Relee's comment. Fix the minimum to at least reduce carnage, then make sure no one does further meddling on others against their wills (voluntary meddling's a different thing), then just leave it off at that. I wouldn't fix every ugly thing, because that's far too much to do on a global scale. Humans'd still be petty, etc. after I was done--I couldn't trust myself to know what's best for everyone.

Of course, that's assuming I can manage to keep from being corrupted by said power. That's why my second and last act with it would be to cut off my (and everyone else's) ability to do that stuff.

Truthfully, it'd probably be safest if this kind of global power never came to pass, yeah. Too much random factor, chance in who attains it first. Fortunately, it's most likely that it'll never happen anyway--that kind of scale is difficult to achieve in the first place, and counters can be developed to everything.

In practical terms, it's very improbable and very dangerous. But I sometimes think about it as a pure thought experiment.

[relee.livejournal.com]

Animals developed compassion as an evolutionary mechanism. Mothers have compassion for their children because if the children don't survive, they don't have offspring. Individuals in a group have compassion because the herd/tribe/gang requires teamwork. Compassion is a survival mechanism. After all, life isn't about the survival of an individual, it's about the survival of species.


While changing people on a dramatic level as altering their capacity for violence may not be quite as possible, it's certainly possible to drug the water supply or introduce gasses or other behavior-altering impetus into the environment on a large scale.


I think it's a reasonable course of action to bathe Africa in Empathy Foam. It's certainly better than the genocide most people seem to reccomend.

[kajarainbow.livejournal.com]

There're really people that suggest genocide as a solution?

[relee.livejournal.com]

Yeah a lot of people think that genocide would be a good way to end strife in the third world. Not just religious folks either. The logic is that with less people there would be more resources to go around, and the survivors would be able to thrive where the masses are being tortured.

Mostly people urge contraceptive use, but it doesn't work, and the population keeps going up with the resources dwindle. Some folks feel that since they won't listen to reason they have to be put down, like animals, for their own good (or at least the good of whoever survives). Most people who would suggest genocide are patient enough to wait for a pandemic to wipe everybody out, but some of them also support the idea of intentionally causing a pandemic.


I said 'most people seem to reccomend' earlier but that was a bit of an exaggeration. I do hear people suggest that almost anytime the subject comes up, but few are really serious... I hope.


Really do hear some horror stories from around the world though. I'm not sure if the children hate-conscription is worse or if the prevailing superstition that raping a little girl will act as a panacea and cure your aids is worse, though. Brr. *shiver*

[alfador-fox.livejournal.com]

"For the good of all of us...except the ones who are dead."