the marquis de Carabas (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
mattersverymuch) wrote2013-04-17 05:38 pm
mattersverymuch) wrote2013-04-17 05:38 pm
o7 ɂ voice
Consider this a disclaimer: what you are about to hear is not a question regarding the Admiral's motives. If I might be blunt, I don't actually care what his motives are, or indeed if he has any at all. Thank you so much for your time.
What purpose does it serve to assign legitimacy to one moral code over another? People subscribe to a moral code because it's what they've been taught, or because it allows them to survive, or because they enjoy it. Some give credence to their own code and consider it better than all others, while some aspire to a code they consider to be superior to theirs.
If one's moral code indicates one's ability to lead and make the "right" choices - the absurdity of which statement I'm not about to delve into, it's far too easy - where do people with elaborate designs on world peace by means of violence fit in, or, conversely, those who would kill to eliminate violent crime, or those who relish crime but would view assisting others as an equally worthy adventure? Of course, there are also hypocrites who betray their own code, or those golden, selfish few who exist alone and codeless.
I would like a definition of right, please. I would like all of them. Maybe I'll make a collage.
spam | merlin
[In a way, he's surprised he wasn't saddled with baggage sooner. Surprise and curiosity don't mean that he wants to be approached or even approach himself, however, so he has been steadfastly ignoring any and all messages from Merlin. They're excruciatingly unimportant.]
[Instead he takes a seat in the gardens - an unusual place of rest for him, which is part of the point. Besides, there's something enjoyable enough about plant life. It doesn't ask annoying questions.]
What purpose does it serve to assign legitimacy to one moral code over another? People subscribe to a moral code because it's what they've been taught, or because it allows them to survive, or because they enjoy it. Some give credence to their own code and consider it better than all others, while some aspire to a code they consider to be superior to theirs.
If one's moral code indicates one's ability to lead and make the "right" choices - the absurdity of which statement I'm not about to delve into, it's far too easy - where do people with elaborate designs on world peace by means of violence fit in, or, conversely, those who would kill to eliminate violent crime, or those who relish crime but would view assisting others as an equally worthy adventure? Of course, there are also hypocrites who betray their own code, or those golden, selfish few who exist alone and codeless.
I would like a definition of right, please. I would like all of them. Maybe I'll make a collage.
spam | merlin
[In a way, he's surprised he wasn't saddled with baggage sooner. Surprise and curiosity don't mean that he wants to be approached or even approach himself, however, so he has been steadfastly ignoring any and all messages from Merlin. They're excruciatingly unimportant.]
[Instead he takes a seat in the gardens - an unusual place of rest for him, which is part of the point. Besides, there's something enjoyable enough about plant life. It doesn't ask annoying questions.]
no subject
. . . How awkward.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
[.................]
[..............................]
[Dean pls.]
no subject
Finally.]
I'll be here all week.
no subject
no subject
You like it. Good luck with your collage, let me know if you need gluesticks.