In the world of violent video games when you kill someone there is a negative reaction. You might even be killed for it, but in the end the deed is undone or your forgiven. Let's say life worked like that. You shoot someone, you see the outcome(like them crying or screaming, etc). Moments later all is forgiven. So if you do harm to your best friend, they will continue to be your best friend. While were at it, you can not die, so there is no after life.
If life worked like this, how evil do you think you would be? Or would you just be kind all the time even though you know you can take advantage of people and get away with it?
If everyone had no consequences, life wouldn't be worth living. You just have to look at what happens with looting during riots to see that.
If only I had no consequences, I'd probably stop going to half my classes, and start learning a lot more on my own. I wouldn't let other people get in my way with my goals, but I'd try not to hurt people (emotionally, economically, etc.). I guess from some standpoints I'd be evil, but from my own eyes I'd just be having fun.
This magic is keeping me alive, but it's making me crazy And I need to save you, but who's going to save me? Please forgive me for what I do, what I don't remember you...
I would probably continue living the way I do now. I don't like doing 'bad' things, not out of a sense of fearing consequences but because I honestly don't enjoy being cruel or hurting people at all. In a world where I'm this immortal being who has no reason to fear consequences... I don't think I could see myself changing. TBH it's a hard concept to grasp, but thinking it over, such things just wouldn't be done.
I think this is a pretty catch-all lack of consequence. From the view of utilitarianism, what makes a particular act "bad" is that it ultimately has an unfavorable outcome. The world that you suggest is that regardless of what you do, an unfavorable outcome lasts for only a little bit, then is entirely erased. From a solely utilitarian point of view, it insinuates that no action is bad, because they ultimately have no bad consequences.
I think this has a lot of problems in terms of morality because it cheapens actions themselves. I do not do ill not because I fear divine punishment or legal retaliation (they are concerns, yes, but hardly the real reason why I "do good"), but simply because any "bad" that I do ultimately results in no actual bad outcomes. For example, I do not wish to lie to my friends because it would hurt their feelings, and I'm invested in their emotional well-being. However, if my lying would not harm their emotional well-being, then technically it would not be a "bad" action. ^_^;
Originally Posted by Carl Sagan
People are not stupid. They believe things for reasons. The last way for skeptics to get the attention of bright, curious, intelligent people is to belittle or condescend or to show arrogance toward their beliefs.
No consequences in life? Pain and suffering are negative consequences, so yeah I would probably do some "evil" things. Without pain and suffering, how can there be "evil"?
Opinions on Fi because banner: I really like Fi for her character design but the way she is used in the game is, IMO, part of a direction Nintendo has been going since WW that I disapprove of: having the game play the game for you.
If this were true, than many great homocides throughout history would be prevented by killing or imprisoning the person at the root of the incident. It would be easier to administer justice, if somebody actually got away with doing a crime. But I would hate such a life, because there would be no feeling of a place in the world, if I could just die over and over.
The mental consequences would exist no matter what. Humans are evolved to have a sense of empathy, so unless every human being was seriously psychotic then we would still want to make eachother happy, not to cause suffering.
If we lost all ability to perceive what constitutes the well being of another person, then sure, I guess I might go kill some dudes.
I would seriously be a lot more violent than I am now. Like I have a seriously strong aversion to conflict its not even funny. (Seriously I hide whenever there is conflict in TV shows and movies its that bad.) And it all roots back to consequences of what happened when I was a kid.
If I got angry or upset with someone [read younger sibling], I would physically lash out against them. And of course I got into trouble for this fact. I didn't like being yelled at for lashing out [terrified of being yelled out really], but I couldn't help the feeling of needing to physically harm something to relieve my anger. [This had led me to biting my arm, so I wouldn't do anything I would get in trouble for. While it wasn't the best of methods, it was the only one that worked for me.]
As I grew older, I let go of my anger and I no longer lashed out physically at those irritated me. [Once again, read younger sibling.] As a result I've become a person who can take things in stride, and I'm really slow to anger. Even then, it takes a lot for me to physically explode.
But in a world of no consequences I know I wouldn't be the person I am today. I wouldn't think of hurting others because I would never learn to let go of the anger I used to have. I know I wouldn't be a good person, and that scares me.
Jack Brant and Joker drawn by Chibi
Rakshael: if I know one thing about Ruki, it's that she'll prove you wrong just for the sake of saying she did it BA Characters