"Morality" quiz
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: "Morality" quiz
1. RH: he's the romantic type, so now he's crushed for life that his love slept with his worst enemy, even if she did it to free him and LJ. He can never look at MM the same way, still, he shouldn't have abused her, after all, he may owe her his life. Maybe there was another way to get them out of prison, maybe not. Robin Hood is the kind of fool for whom love is more important than life. His philosophy isn't very compatible with the real world.
2. MM: she did the thing that was most likely to succeed, she probably couldn't have done otherwise. She made a terrible sacrifice. It probably went over her head though, what kind of effect this would have on RH. After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad.
3. LJ: he seems to be pretty popular here, but maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend.
4. SN: he imprisions the (I assume) mostly innocent, and then abuses power in a very cruel way.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
It could be, though, that this was precisely the point: how people will fill in the missing details reveals their moral reasoning about the matter.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 6:33 am It's probably not a good idea to name characters in the scenario after Robin Hood characters if we want people to not fill in any missing information with what they already know of Robin Hood stories.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
I don't know. But IRL, typically, might makes right. It somehow woks.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 21st, 2020, 11:34 am"Power" results in having ontological views that can't be wrong? How would that work?
- - -
That's no proof that there is no objective morality. It's, at most, proof that none, or one, at most, of those people know what objective morality is, and the rest and wrong.
Remember, moral objectivism was never meant to be _descriptive_ moral objectivism, but _prescriptive_ moral objectivism.
Even you implicitly advocate moral objectivism, such as when you freely call people morons and such, without specifying that what you're stating is merely your opinion, but not necessarily the truth.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: "Morality" quiz
Little John next as he appreciated Marion's quality and did the practical thing
R Hood and the Sheriff equally bad . Robin betrayed Marion and the Sheriff was just doing his duty.
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: "Morality" quiz
Atla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 9:58 am Guess I'm the only one who ranked RH first, here's an explanation:
1. RH: he's the romantic type, so now he's crushed for life that his love slept with his worst enemy, even if she did it to free him and LJ. He can never look at MM the same way, still, he shouldn't have abused her, after all, he may owe her his life. Maybe there was another way to get them out of prison, maybe not. Robin Hood is the kind of fool for whom love is more important than life. His philosophy isn't very compatible with the real world.
2. MM: she did the thing that was most likely to succeed, she probably couldn't have done otherwise. She made a terrible sacrifice. It probably went over her head though, what kind of effect this would have on RH. After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad.
3. LJ: he seems to be pretty popular here, but maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend.
4. SN: he imprisions the (I assume) mostly innocent, and then abuses power in a very cruel way.
Your reasoning on this gives material for a conversation. I'll tell you why I disagree with you.
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
SN: We agree on him. He is corrupt. Even if he had been right to jail RH and LJ, he was wrong to let prisoners go based on someone having sex with him; that is a gross abuse of power and authority.
So, do you find my comments convincing? Why or why not?
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: "Morality" quiz
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.[/quote]Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pm Your reasoning on this gives material for a conversation. I'll tell you why I disagree with you.
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
SN: We agree on him. He is corrupt. Even if he had been right to jail RH and LJ, he was wrong to let prisoners go based on someone having sex with him; that is a gross abuse of power and authority.
So, do you find my comments convincing? Why or why not?
I assumed that he abused her verbally, after, in his eyes, she ruined their love. If it was also physical abuse then it's an entirely different story though.
If MM really loved RH the way RH loved MM, then she would have known that he'll probably eventually come to his senses and apologize to her, and he'll try to work it out.MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
Again I don't think that RH really rejected her, RH is supposed to be of noble character, who temporarily lost it here.LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: "Morality" quiz
Atla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:02 pmJack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pm Your reasoning on this gives material for a conversation. I'll tell you why I disagree with you.
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
SN: We agree on him. He is corrupt. Even if he had been right to jail RH and LJ, he was wrong to let prisoners go based on someone having sex with him; that is a gross abuse of power and authority.
So, do you find my comments convincing? Why or why not?I assumed that he abused her verbally, after, in his eyes, she ruined their love. If it was also physical abuse then it's an entirely different story though.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pm
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
I am judging it based on the verbal abuse only. What RH says is wrong and he ought not say it. So RH is definitely in the wrong. We don't have anything that we can definitely say is wrong with what MM and LJ do; consequently, as far as we can tell from the story, they are better than RH, who we know to be wrong.
Atla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:02 pmIf MM really loved RH the way RH loved MM, then she would have known that he'll probably eventually come to his senses and apologize to her, and he'll try to work it out.MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
You are making quite a few assumptions that are not in the story as told. Also, loving someone does not mean that one does not take someone at their word. She may love him, but he has told her he does not want to ever see her again. If she accepts that as fact, then she needs to move on with her life. Accepting that as fact has nothing whatever to do with how much she loved him; it has to do with whether she believes him or not. Those are completely separate ideas.
If RH is as you say, then he is even worse and deserves to be judged even more harshly than I have done. From your description, RH is an idiot who says what he does not really mean. MM is better off without being with an unstable jerk who says things he does not mean.
Also, it is ridiculous that you are suggesting that MM did not really love RH. She slept with the evil SN to save him; whereas RH has done nothing for MM in the story. We have no reason to believe that RH really loved MM from the story, but we do have reason to believe that MM really loved RH.
Atla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:02 pmAgain I don't think that RH really rejected her, RH is supposed to be of noble character, who temporarily lost it here.LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
If RH were of noble character, he would not tell her he never wants to see her again if it is not true. You represent RH as a man who says what he does not mean, who is unstable and changeable, who would make a very poor partner in life. If RH is as you depict him, no woman in her right mind would want to be with him. A man who cannot control his temper is not a good man to be with.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: "Morality" quiz
Well if you want my honest opinion, the deeply romantic mindset is alien to you, and it's alien to most people. Personally I find life dull and empty without it.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:20 pm
I am judging it based on the verbal abuse only. What RH says is wrong and he ought not say it. So RH is definitely in the wrong. We don't have anything that we can definitely say is wrong with what MM and LJ do; consequently, as far as we can tell from the story, they are better than RH, who we know to be wrong.
You are making quite a few assumptions that are not in the story as told. Also, loving someone does not mean that one does not take someone at their word. She may love him, but he has told her he does not want to ever see her again. If she accepts that as fact, then she needs to move on with her life. Accepting that as fact has nothing whatever to do with how much she loved him; it has to do with whether she believes him or not. Those are completely separate ideas.
If RH is as you say, then he is even worse and deserves to be judged even more harshly than I have done. From your description, RH is an idiot who says what he does not really mean. MM is better off without being with an unstable jerk who says things he does not mean.
Also, it is ridiculous that you are suggesting that MM did not really love RH. She slept with the evil SN to save him; whereas RH has done nothing for MM in the story. We have no reason to believe that RH really loved MM from the story, but we do have reason to believe that MM really loved RH.
If RH were of noble character, he would not tell her he never wants to see her again if it is not true. You represent RH as a man who says what he does not mean, who is unstable and changeable, who would make a very poor partner in life. If RH is as you depict him, no woman in her right mind would want to be with him. A man who cannot control his temper is not a good man to be with.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7096
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
You are right in one thing. Only one person knows what objective morality means, and that is ME.baker wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 10:22 amI don't know. But IRL, typically, might makes right. It somehow woks.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 21st, 2020, 11:34 am"Power" results in having ontological views that can't be wrong? How would that work?
- - -
That's no proof that there is no objective morality. It's, at most, proof that none, or one, at most, of those people know what objective morality is, and the rest and wrong.
Remember, moral objectivism was never meant to be _descriptive_ moral objectivism, but _prescriptive_ moral objectivism.
Even you implicitly advocate moral objectivism, such as when you freely call people morons and such, without specifying that what you're stating is merely your opinion, but not necessarily the truth.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7937
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
After moderating this thread, I can only agree wholeheartedly. That's what I would have done. All I can say in defense is that the author likely hangs out with folks simpler than the members of this Forum.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 6:33 am It's probably not a good idea to name characters in the scenario after Robin Hood characters if we want people to not fill in any missing information with what they already know of Robin Hood stories.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7937
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
I agree the Sheriff arresting the two is his duty, but since this story focuses on his interactions with Marion, I disagree that he was doing his duty.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7937
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: "Morality" quiz
You are missing the fact that LJ broke the most sacred code of all, the Bro Code.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pmAtla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 9:58 am Guess I'm the only one who ranked RH first, here's an explanation:
1. RH: he's the romantic type, so now he's crushed for life that his love slept with his worst enemy, even if she did it to free him and LJ. He can never look at MM the same way, still, he shouldn't have abused her, after all, he may owe her his life. Maybe there was another way to get them out of prison, maybe not. Robin Hood is the kind of fool for whom love is more important than life. His philosophy isn't very compatible with the real world.
2. MM: she did the thing that was most likely to succeed, she probably couldn't have done otherwise. She made a terrible sacrifice. It probably went over her head though, what kind of effect this would have on RH. After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad.
3. LJ: he seems to be pretty popular here, but maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend.
4. SN: he imprisions the (I assume) mostly innocent, and then abuses power in a very cruel way.
Your reasoning on this gives material for a conversation. I'll tell you why I disagree with you.
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
SN: We agree on him. He is corrupt. Even if he had been right to jail RH and LJ, he was wrong to let prisoners go based on someone having sex with him; that is a gross abuse of power and authority.
So, do you find my comments convincing? Why or why not?
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: "Morality" quiz
Atla wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:30 pmWell if you want my honest opinion, the deeply romantic mindset is alien to you, and it's alien to most people. Personally I find life dull and empty without it.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 1:20 pm
I am judging it based on the verbal abuse only. What RH says is wrong and he ought not say it. So RH is definitely in the wrong. We don't have anything that we can definitely say is wrong with what MM and LJ do; consequently, as far as we can tell from the story, they are better than RH, who we know to be wrong.
You are making quite a few assumptions that are not in the story as told. Also, loving someone does not mean that one does not take someone at their word. She may love him, but he has told her he does not want to ever see her again. If she accepts that as fact, then she needs to move on with her life. Accepting that as fact has nothing whatever to do with how much she loved him; it has to do with whether she believes him or not. Those are completely separate ideas.
If RH is as you say, then he is even worse and deserves to be judged even more harshly than I have done. From your description, RH is an idiot who says what he does not really mean. MM is better off without being with an unstable jerk who says things he does not mean.
Also, it is ridiculous that you are suggesting that MM did not really love RH. She slept with the evil SN to save him; whereas RH has done nothing for MM in the story. We have no reason to believe that RH really loved MM from the story, but we do have reason to believe that MM really loved RH.
If RH were of noble character, he would not tell her he never wants to see her again if it is not true. You represent RH as a man who says what he does not mean, who is unstable and changeable, who would make a very poor partner in life. If RH is as you depict him, no woman in her right mind would want to be with him. A man who cannot control his temper is not a good man to be with.
It is funny you say that. Here is what the psychologist and marriage counselor who devised the test says of my ranking:
"• LJ, MM, RH, SN: You're a romantic, idealizing women or expecting too much of men. 15% total."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... iz-results
- Jack D Ripper
- Posts: 610
- Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
- Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
- Contact:
Re: "Morality" quiz
LuckyR wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 2:38 pmYou are missing the fact that LJ broke the most sacred code of all, the Bro Code.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pm
Your reasoning on this gives material for a conversation. I'll tell you why I disagree with you.
RH: You say: " he shouldn't have abused her". That is why I rate him poorly. If he did not do that, then, as far as we can tell, he did nothing wrong, regardless of how others feel about it. When deciding whether to be with someone or not, it is up to that individual to decide what matters to them and what does not. If you would choose differently, that is because you are you and he is he.
MM: You say: "After that, looks like she immadiately agreed to run off with LJ though, gave up on RH without much heartache, which is just sad." She took RH at his word; RH said he never wanted to see her again. So, if RH never wants to see MM again, then she and RH are done, which was not her choice at all. And if RH does not mean what he says, then he is even worse, because he is the cause of a breakup that otherwise would not happen. This is RH's fault; he breaks up with her, not the other way around. As for leaving quickly, there is no reason to think that SN will not just arrest them again, so they need to leave promptly.
LJ: You say: "maybe he's just a jovial asshole of weak character. Defending MM's choice was all right, but he didn't think twice to capitalize on the tragedy of RH and MM, he immediately broke his friends trust and stole his girlfriend." There is nothing in his actions that suggest that he is an asshole or jovial or of weak character. He also does not steal MM from RH. You seem to be forgetting the fact that RH rejected MM. RH broke up with MM. So LJ is not taking RH's girlfriend, because she is no longer RH's girlfriend because of RH's choice. And there is no breaking of trust, as, again, RH has broken up with MM, so MM is not RH's girlfriend when LJ goes away with her. Once RH breaks up with MM, she is under no obligation to RH at all. So, as far as LJ is concerned, MM is an unattached woman (which she in fact is as soon as RH breaks up with her), not anyone's girlfriend when he joins her. Again, leaving quickly is a good idea, given the corrupt SN being around who may decide to arrest them again.
SN: We agree on him. He is corrupt. Even if he had been right to jail RH and LJ, he was wrong to let prisoners go based on someone having sex with him; that is a gross abuse of power and authority.
So, do you find my comments convincing? Why or why not?
The Bro Code is just silly and stupid. In fact, it was made up as a joke:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- ... story.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bro_Code
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bro_culture
So, yes, I ignore the Bro Code, as every sensible person does in living one's life and thinking about how one should live.
-
- Posts: 2540
- Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm
Re: "Morality" quiz
I rather consider that the 'shallow romance', not very deeply emotionally invested, no too hard feelings, good for the marriage counselor business. The deep romanticist is an almost fatalistic fool who may find it difficult or even impossible to get over certain things, but he wants to live like that anyway, pretty bad for the marriage counselor business.Jack D Ripper wrote: ↑December 22nd, 2020, 3:32 pm
It is funny you say that. Here is what the psychologist and marriage counselor who devised the test says of my ranking:
"• LJ, MM, RH, SN: You're a romantic, idealizing women or expecting too much of men. 15% total."
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog ... iz-results
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023